Re: [PATCH UPDATED 03/10] threadgroup: extend threadgroup_lock() to cover exit and exec

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Hello, Frederic.

On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 04:30:54PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> I don't understand what you mean. On your patches, you only process tasks
> that don't have PF_EXITING, ie: you don't include these in the flex array
> on cgroup_attach_proc(). So that still applies in my proposal.
> 
> From the exit path we would have:
> 
> 	exit_signal() {
> 		lock_threadgroup_change(task);
> 		task->flags |= PF_EXITING;
> 		lock_threadgroup(task);
> 	}
> 
> 	exit all the rest: mm, etc...
> 
> Then from cgroup_attach_proc():
> 
> 	lock_threadgroup(task);
> 	for_each_thread(task) {
> 		if (!(task->flags & PF_EXITING))
> 			include in flex array
> 	}
> 
> Am I forgetting something?

The point I was trying to make was that doing the above would make
->exit() called on dangling task of a threadgroup in rare cases.
ie. With the proposed change, after a threadgroup migration, all tasks
in the threadgroup is in the new cgroup.  No method will be called on
the old cgroup for any of the member task.  With the above change,
process migration would leave out dying tasks and ->exit() can be
called with the old cgroup.

Hmm... that said, it probably doesn't matter all that much either way.
I'll update the patchset and repost.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux Resources]     [Free Dating]     [Archives]
Add to Google Powered by Linux