[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111222153004.GA30522@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:30:04 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Q: cgroup: Questions about possible issues in cgroup locking
On 12/21, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:24:13AM -0800, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
> >
> > If you call exec from a thread other than g, g is now unlinked. So
> > "t != g" will always be true. If you then pthread_create, you now
> > have two threads so "t != __prev" will also always be true. So
> > you now have an infinite loop.
>
> Oh you're right.
>
> But then we can't use t != t->group_leader because that assumes while_each_thread()
> started on the leader.
Yes, this can't work.
Besides, we need more burriers to rely on the ->group_leader check.
See http://marc.info/?t=127688987300002
in particular, http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127714242731448
I think this should work, but then we should do something with the
users like zap_threads().
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