[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191114193736.GL4163745@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:37:36 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: memcg: switch to css_tryget() in
get_mem_cgroup_from_mm()
Hello,
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 08:33:40PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > It is useful for controlling admissions of new userspace visible uses
> > - e.g. a tracepoint shouldn't be allowed to be attached to a cgroup
> > which has already been deleted.
>
> I am not sure I understand. Roman says that the cgroup can get offline
> right after the function returns. How is "already deleted" different
> from "just deleted"? I thought that the state is preserved at least
> while the rcu lock is held but my memory is dim here.
It's the same difference as between "opening a file and deleting it"
and "deleting a file and opening it". We shoud allow the former while
not allowing the latter.
> > We're just using it too liberally.
>
> Can we get a doc update to be explicit about sensible usecases so that
> others can be dropped accordingly?
Yeah, we should audit and convert the uses and update the doc.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists