| Date | Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:51:17 +0530 | From | Srivatsa Vaddagiri <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code |
| |
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:22AM -0800, menage@google.com wrote: > +/** > + * container_lock - lock out any changes to container structures > + * > + * The out of memory (oom) code needs to mutex_lock containers > + * from being changed while it scans the tasklist looking for a > + * task in an overlapping container.
Which specific portion of oom code cares abt container structure being intact?
If I understand correctly, only cpuset requires this double locking. More specifically, cpusets cares about walking cpuset->parent list safely with callback_mutex held correct?
If that is the case, I think we can push container_lock entirely inside cpuset.c and not have others exposed to this double-lock complexity. This is possible because cpuset.c (build on top of containers) still has cpuset->parent and walking cpuset->parent list safely can be made possible with a second lock which is local to only cpuset.c.
-- Regards, vatsa - 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/
|