lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 16/28] memcg: kmem controller charge/uncharge infrastructure
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:55:38PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 05/30/2012 05:53 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:37:57PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >>On 05/30/2012 05:37 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>>Right. __mem_cgroup_get_kmem_cache() fetches the memcg of the owner
> >>>and calls memcg_create_cache_enqueue() which does css_tryget(&memcg->css).
> >>>After this tryget I think you're fine. And in-between you're safe against
> >>>css_set removal due to rcu_read_lock().
> >>>
> >>>I'm less clear with __mem_cgroup_new_kmem_page() though...
> >>
> >>That one does not get memcg->css but it does call mem_cgroup_get(),
> >>that does prevent against the memcg structure being freed, which I
> >>believe to be good enough.
> >
> >What if the owner calls cgroup_exit() between mem_cgroup_from_task()
> >and mem_cgroup_get()? The css_set which contains the memcg gets freed.
> >Also the reference on the memcg doesn't even prevent the css_set to
> >be removed, does it?
> It doesn't, but we don't really care. The css can go away, if the
> memcg structure stays.

Ah right, the memcg itself is only freed at destroy time.

> The caches will outlive the memcg anyway,
> since it is possible that you delete it, with some caches still
> holding objects that
> are not freed (they will be marked as dead).

I guess I need to look at how the destroy path is handled in your patchset
then. Or how you ensure that __mem_cgroup_new_kmem_page() can't race against
destroy.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-30 18:01    [W:0.320 / U:0.544 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site