linux-kernel - Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 7 Mar 2007 19:36:04 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
To:	menage@...gle.com
Cc:	sekharan@...ibm.com, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xemul@...ru, dev@...ru,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org, pj@....com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	mbligh@...gle.com, winget@...gle.com, rohitseth@...gle.com,
	serue@...ibm.com, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 05:51:17PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> If that is the case, I think we can push container_lock entirely inside 
> cpuset.c and not have others exposed to this double-lock complexity.
> This is possible because cpuset.c (build on top of containers) still has
> cpuset->parent and walking cpuset->parent list safely can be made
> possible with a second lock which is local to only cpuset.c.

Hope I am not shooting in the dark here!

If we can indeed avoid container_lock in generic code, it will simplify
code like attach_task (for ex: post_attach/attach can be clubbed into one 
single callback).

-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/