linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] cgroup: cgroup: drain specific subsystems when mounting/destroying a root

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aKCu0oLBbgxtKg_S@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 06:16:18 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com>
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, mkoutny@...e.com, lizefan@...wei.com,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	lujialin4@...wei.com, chenridong@...wei.com, hdanton@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cgroup: cgroup: drain specific subsystems when
 mounting/destroying a root

Hello,

On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 09:26:59AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
...
> I've tested that adding a dedicated cgroup_offline_wq workqueue for CSS offline operations, which
> could resolve the current issue.
> 
> Going further, I propose we split cgroup_destroy_wq into three specialized workqueues to better
> match the destruction lifecycle:
> cgroup_offline_wq - Handles offline operations
> cgroup_release_wq - Manages resource release
> cgroup_free_wq - Performs final memory freeing
> 
> This explicit separation would clearly delineate responsibilities for each workqueue.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this approach, Tejun?

Yeah, sure. It'd also be helpful to note in a comment why separate
workqueues are used.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun