lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 08/16] freezer: use dedicated lock instead of task_lock() + memory barrier
On 08/19, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> it's by no means a
> hot path and the priority is staying unintrusive and safe. This patch
> makes it simply use a dedicated lock

Agreed. but could you explain why it should be irq-safe? This is not
clear from the changelog.

> + if (!(current->flags & PF_NOFREEZE))
> + current->flags |= PF_FROZEN;

it is not clear why do we check PF_NOFREEZE... but OK, iiuc you
remove this check later anyway.



Off-topic, but fake_signal_wake_up() is not safe if the caller
try_to_freeze_cgroup(). Unlike try_to_freeze_tasks() (which holds
tasklist) we can race with the exiting thread, ->sighand can be
NULL.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-28 19:57    [W:0.307 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site