lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH UPDATED 03/10] threadgroup: extend threadgroup_lock() to cover exit and exec
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:30:01AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Frederic.
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 03:01:39PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > + * @tsk's threadgroup is going through changes - lock out users
> > > + * which expect stable threadgroup. Do this before actually
> > > + * starting tearing down @tsk so that locked threadgroup has either
> > > + * alive or dead tasks, not something inbetween.
> > > + */
> > > + threadgroup_change_begin(tsk);
> > > +
> >
> > I still wonder why there is a so big coverage of this lock. I mean
> > why is it called right before exit_irq_thread() and released so late.
> > All we want is to lock cgroup_exit() I think, after which tasks can't be
> > migrated.
>
> That way, cgroup plugins never see tasks in the process of
> deconstruction. Its ->mm, ->sighand, ->signal and so on either don't
> exist or continue to exist across all cgroup callbacks. It's simpler
> and safer (especially as bugs in this area would only be visible when
> migration and exit race), and if we're gonna synchronize exit path at
> all, there isn't anything to lose by excluding the whole thing.

Fine.

But I don't think it's very useful to protect against irq_exit_thread(),
what happens there is purely of internal irq interest.

Then right after, PF_EXITING is set before any interesting change.
Isn't it possible to simply lock this flag setting? IIRC, as soon
as the PF_EXITING flag is set, you ignore the task for attachment.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-02 17:31    [W:0.135 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site