From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755087Ab2JSVHp (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:07:45 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:55925 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753526Ab2JSVHn (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:07:43 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:07:38 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: Li Zefan , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH cgroup/for-3.7-fixes 1/2] Revert "cgroup: Remove task_lock() from cgroup_post_fork()" Message-ID: <20121019210738.GA1180@google.com> References: <20121008020000.GB2575@localhost> <20121019005922.GG13370@google.com> <20121019193808.GL13370@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Frederic. On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 03:44:20PM -0400, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > For -stable, I think it's better to revert. If you want to remove > > task_lock, let's do it for 3.8. > > I don't think that a wrong comment justifies a patch to stable. I'm not really sure whether it's safe or not. It seems all usages are protected by write locking css_set_lock but maybe I'm missing something and as the commit is born out of confusion, I'm very inclined to revert it by default. Are you sure this one is safe? Thanks. -- tejun