From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1754369AbYKUJNy@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754369AbYKUJNy (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 21 Nov 2008 04:13:54 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752388AbYKUJNk
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 21 Nov 2008 04:13:40 -0500
Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:63379 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751769AbYKUJNj (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 21 Nov 2008 04:13:39 -0500
Message-ID: <49267AFD.8050707@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:10:21 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
CC: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
       Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
       Serge Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] fix CGROUP VS RCU
References: <49267609.8050600@cn.fujitsu.com> <20081121010637.0f71ffff.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20081121010637.0f71ffff.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:49:13 +0800 Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
>> current some cgroup struct are protected by RCU.
>>
>> struct protected by RCU:
>> 	struct css_set, struct cgroup_subsys_state, struct cgroup
>>
>> pointer protected by RCU:
>> 	struct task_struct.cgroups, struct css_set.subsys[*],
>> 	struct cgroup_subsys_state.cgroup
>> the last two pointers are readonly pointer!
>>
>> these patches are fix these structs, and pointers. And a faker:
>> struct cgroup_subsys.root
>>
>> Not cleanup all yet.
>>
> 
> These patches aren't sequence numbered.  In what order should they be
> applied?
> 
> 
> 
> 

No order number, they are dependent(except 2 patches which have order number).

Lai.