From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Frederic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, "Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
"缪 勰" <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] cgroup: fix race between fork and cgroup freezing
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:10:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120312161040.GA23255@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F5DBB8C.6090904@cn.fujitsu.com>
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 05:02:04PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> - We still need some kind of locking to syncronize fork and the traverser.
> fork side is protected by tasklist_lock, while the traverser takes
> css_set_lock.
Can't we do both after tasklist_lock is released under css_set_lock?
> - After linking the new task to css set list, the task is visible and thus
> can be moved to another cgroup, which makes things more complicated and
> the subsystem callbacks may have to acquire cgroup_mutex.
Hmmm... freezer currently doesn't allow migrating in and out of frozen
cgroup and even when it does callbacks in the migration path should
synchronize against freezer->lock. I *think* that should be enough
and can't see why this will be simpler or more complex depending on
when fork callback is called.
> - The task_counter subsystem wants to get notified before the new task
> is linked, so it's able to abort the fork.
This one maybe but for this cgroup_fork_callbacks() is already too
late, isn't it? We better have pre-fork callbacks instead, no?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-12 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-08 8:45 [RFC][PATCH] cgroup: fix race between fork and cgroup freezing Li Zefan
2012-03-08 18:26 ` Tejun Heo
2012-03-09 6:26 ` Li Zefan
2012-03-09 16:53 ` Tejun Heo
2012-03-12 9:02 ` Li Zefan
2012-03-12 16:10 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2012-03-19 13:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-03-19 15:05 ` Frederic Weisbecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120312161040.GA23255@google.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).