[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081209125829.556b1e40.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 12:58:29 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [mm] [PATCH 3/4] Memory cgroup hierarchical reclaim (v4)
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 12:53:41 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> Not yet.
>
> Those dead locks cannot be fixed as long as reclaim path tries to hold cgroup_mutex.
> (current mmotm doesn't hold cgroup_mutex on reclaim path if !use_hierarchy and
> I'm testing with !use_hierarchy. It works well basically, but I got another bug
> at rmdir today, and digging it now.)
>
> The dead lock I've fixed by memcg-avoid-dead-lock-caused-by-race-between-oom-and-cpuset_attach.patch
> is another one(removed cgroup_lock from oom code).
>
Okay, then removing cgroup_lock from memory-reclaim path is a way to go..
Thank you.
-Kame
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists