lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Is not locking task_lock in cgroup_fork() safe?
Hello, Frederic.

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:53:47PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > For now, I'll revert the patches and cc stable. Let's think about
> > improving it later.
>
> Ok for reverting in cgroup_fork(). Is it necessary for the
> cgroup_post_fork() thing? I don't immediately see any race involved
> there.

Even if there isn't an actual race, the comment is dead wrong. I'm
reverting the following three patches. Let's try again later.

7e381b0eb1 ("cgroup: Drop task_lock(parent) on cgroup_fork()")
7e3aa30ac8 ("cgroup: Remove task_lock() from cgroup_post_fork()")
c84cdf75cc ("cgroup: Remove unnecessary task_lock before fetching css_set on migration")

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-10-19 03:01    [W:0.062 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site