From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
"cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/9] cgroup: cgroup v2 freezer
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2019 12:58:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190420105838.GA17468@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190419165600.GC23357@tower.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
On 04/19, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > wake_up_interruptible() ?
> > >
> > > Wait_up_interruptible() is supposed to work with a workqueue,
> > > but here there is nothing like this. Probably, I didn't understand your idea.
> > > Can you, please, elaborate a bit more?
> >
> > Not sure I understand... We need to wake up the task if it sleeps in
> > do_freezer_trap(), right? do_freezer_trap() uses TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, so
> > why can't wake_up_interruptible() == __wake_up(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) work?
>
> Right, but __wake_up is supposed to wake threads blocked on a waitqueue:
Ugh sorry ;) of course I meant wake_up_state(task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE).
> > > > > + if (unlikely(cgroup_task_frozen(current))) {
> > > > > spin_unlock_irq(&sighand->siglock);
> > > > > + cgroup_leave_frozen(true);
> > > > > goto relock;
> > > > > }
> > > >
> > > > afaics cgroup_leave_frozen(false) makes more sense here.
> > >
> > > Why? I don't see any reasons why the task should remain in the frozen
> > > state after this point.
> >
> > But cgroup_leave_frozen(false) will equally clear ->frozen if !CGRP_FREEZE ?
> > OTOH, if CGRP_FREEZE is set again, why do we need to clear ->frozen?
>
> Hm, it might work too, but I'm not sure I like it more. IMO, the best option
> is to have a single cgroup_leave_frozen(true) in signal.c, it's just simpler.
> If a user changed the desired state of cgroup twice, there is no need to avoid
> state transitions. Or maybe I don't see it yet.
Then why do we need cgroup_leave_frozen(false) in wait_for_vfork_done() ? How
does it differ from get_signal() ?
If nothing else. Suppose that wait_for_vfork_done() calls leave(false) and this
races with freezer, CGRP_FREEZE is already set but JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE is not.
This sets TIF_SIGPENDING to ensure the task won't return to user mode, thus it
calls get_signal().
get_signal() doesn't see JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE, it notices ->frozen == T and does
cgroup_leave_frozen(true) which clears ->frozen.
Then the task calls dequeue_signal(), clears TIF_SIGPENDING and returns to user
mode?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-20 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-05 17:46 [PATCH v10 0/9] freezer for cgroup v2 Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 1/9] cgroup: rename freezer.c into legacy_freezer.c Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 2/9] cgroup: implement __cgroup_task_count() helper Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 3/9] cgroup: protect cgroup->nr_(dying_)descendants by css_set_lock Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 4/9] cgroup: cgroup v2 freezer Roman Gushchin
2019-04-19 15:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-19 16:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-19 16:36 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-19 16:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-19 16:26 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-19 16:56 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-20 10:58 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2019-04-22 22:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-24 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-24 22:06 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-26 17:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-24 16:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-24 22:10 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-26 17:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 5/9] kselftests: cgroup: don't fail on cg_kill_all() error in cg_destroy() Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 6/9] kselftests: cgroup: add freezer controller self-tests Roman Gushchin
2019-07-16 14:48 ` Naresh Kamboju
2019-07-17 0:49 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-07-17 8:56 ` Naresh Kamboju
2019-07-18 18:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 7/9] cgroup: make TRACE_CGROUP_PATH irq-safe Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 8/9] cgroup: add tracing points for cgroup v2 freezer Roman Gushchin
2019-04-05 17:47 ` [PATCH v10 9/9] cgroup: document cgroup v2 freezer interface Roman Gushchin
2019-04-19 18:29 ` [PATCH v10 0/9] freezer for cgroup v2 Tejun Heo
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=20190420105838.GA17468@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=guroan@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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