[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110904180206.GA28520@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 20:02:06 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: matthltc@...ibm.com, rjw@...k.pl, paul@...lmenage.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] cgroup_freezer: fix freezer->state setting bug in
freezer_change_state()
On 09/03, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> @@ -308,24 +308,24 @@ static int freezer_change_state(struct cgroup *cgroup,
> spin_lock_irq(&freezer->lock);
>
> update_if_frozen(cgroup, freezer);
> - if (goal_state == freezer->state)
> - goto out;
> -
> - freezer->state = goal_state;
>
> switch (goal_state) {
> case CGROUP_THAWED:
> - atomic_dec(&system_freezing_cnt);
> + if (freezer->state != CGROUP_THAWED)
> + atomic_dec(&system_freezing_cnt);
> + freezer->state = CGROUP_THAWED;
> unfreeze_cgroup(cgroup, freezer);
> break;
> case CGROUP_FROZEN:
> - atomic_inc(&system_freezing_cnt);
> + if (freezer->state == CGROUP_THAWED)
> + atomic_inc(&system_freezing_cnt);
> + freezer->state = CGROUP_FREEZING;
> retval = try_to_freeze_cgroup(cgroup, freezer);
Cough. Now it doesn't look right to me ;)
If the user write "FROZEN" into the control file, we should not
turn the CGROUP_FROZEN state into CGROUP_FREEZING. Probably this
is harmless, but this looks wrong and this doesn't match the
current behaviour, user-visible change.
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