[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111222225102.GM17084@google.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:51:02 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: remove tasklist_lock from
cgroup_attach_proc
Hello,
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 02:26:55PM -0800, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
> @@ -2283,14 +2261,26 @@ static int attach_task_by_pid(struct cgroup *cgrp, u64 pid, bool threadgroup)
>
> threadgroup_lock(tsk);
>
> - if (threadgroup)
> + if (threadgroup) {
> + if (!thread_group_leader(tsk)) {
> + /*
> + * a race with de_thread from another thread's exec()
> + * may strip us of our leadership, if this happens,
> + * there is no choice but to throw this task away and
> + * try again (from cgroup_procs_write); this is
> + * "double-double-toil-and-trouble-check locking".
> + */
> + ret = -EAGAIN;
> + goto out_unlock_threadgroup;
> + }
> ret = cgroup_attach_proc(cgrp, tsk);
Ummm... can't we just do tsk = tsk->leader after locking threadgroup?
Why do we need to retry from the beginning?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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