linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cpuset: record old_mems

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 5 Jun 2013 12:45:22 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
	Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cpuset: record old_mems_allowed in struct cpuset

Hello, Li.

On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 05:16:24PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> @@ -1425,7 +1435,6 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
>  	 * Change mm, possibly for multiple threads in a threadgroup. This is
>  	 * expensive and may sleep.
>  	 */
> -	cpuset_attach_nodemask_to = cs->mems_allowed;
>  	mm = get_task_mm(leader);
>  	if (mm) {
>  		mpol_rebind_mm(mm, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);

This looks a bit suspicious to me.  Now we're setting mm's nodemask to
guarantee_online_mems() output rather than cs->mems_allowed.  Is this
change intended?  If so, it probably deserves an explanation in the
description?

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/