[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110809181947.GB28442@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 20:19:47 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] cgroups: Add a task counter subsystem
On 08/09, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:57:08PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > cgroup_attach_proc() is different, it calls cgroup_task_migrate()
> > > > after ->attach_task(). Cough.
> > >
> > > That's bad. I need to fix that.
> > >
> > > So if it returns -ESRCH, I shall not call attach_task() on it
> > > but cancel_attach_task().
> >
> > Afaics this can't help, or I misunderstood. probably attach_task()
> > can check PF_EXITING...
>
> But cgroup_task_migrate() checks that already before migrating
> cgroups (checks PF_EXITING under task_lock() so that it's
> synchronized against cgroup_exit())
Yes, but how this can help?
->attach_task() is called before cgroup_task_migrate(). Suppose
that it exits before ->attach_task(). In this case we shouldn't
uncharge the old cgroup, it was already uncharged by cgroup_exit.
Oleg.
--
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