Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:21:59 -0700 | From | "Paul Menage" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] CFS CGroup: Report usage |
| |
On 10/22/07, Paul Menage <menage@google.com> wrote: > > Using cgroup_mutex is certainly possible for now, although more > heavy-weight than I'd like long term. Using css_get isn't the right > approach, I think - we shouldn't be able to cause an rmdir to fail due > to a concurrent read. >
OK, the obvious solution is to use the same approach for subsystem state objects as we do for the struct cgroup itself - move the calls to the subsystem destroy methods to cgroup_diput. A control file dentry will keep alive the parent dir's dentry, which will keep alive the cgroup and (with this change) the subsystem state objects too.
The only potential drawback that I can see is that an open fd on a cgroup directory or a control file will keep more memory alive than it would have done previously.
Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |