[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1257795143.4108.375.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:32:23 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>,
Spencer Candland <spencer@...ehost.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: utime/stime decreasing on thread exit
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 20:23 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/09, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 18:20 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > > Stanislaw has already sent the patch, but I don't know what happened
> > > with this patch:
> > >
> > > [PATCH 1/2] posix-cpu-timers: avoid do_sys_times() races with __exit_signal()
> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124505545131145
> >
> > That patch has the siglock in the function calling
> > thread_group_cputime(), the 22 code had it near the loop proper, which
> > to me seems a more sensible thing, since there could be more callers,
> > no?
>
> Well, we can't take ->siglock in thread_group_cputime(), sometimes it
> is called under ->siglock. do_task_stat(), get_cpu_itimer() at least.
>
> IIRC, Stanislaw verified other callers have no problems with this helper.
Would have made fine changelog material :-)
--
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