From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH pm-freezer 1/4] cgroup_freezer: fix freezer->state setting bug in freezer_change_state()
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 02:31:27 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110902173127.GA3083@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110902171517.GA8247@redhat.com>
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 07:15:17PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > I guess it depends on the viewpoint. A simple analogy would be using
> > WARN_ON_ONCE() instead of BUG_ON() so that the mode of failure is
> > softer. This change isn't likely to make bugs significantly more
> > difficult to discover so why not?
>
> I agree either way.
>
> Personally I prefer your current patch. Because it is not clear why
> do we call try_to_freeze_cgroup() if it was already called. And, the
> 2nd call can silently hide the problem if we have some bug.
>
> But of course, this is up to you and Matt.
I'm okay either way too. It would make a bug in that area a bit less
annoying and thus may decrease the chance of bug report, but it means
that we ship with built-in easy work around (if it doesn't work at the
first kick, kick again), which can be beneficial in practice.
> > > But I agree either way. Rafael, I think 1-4 are fine, but I think
> > > we need the simple 5/4, will send in a minute...
> >
> > Can you please wait a bit? The second one was broken (missing unlock)
>
> Yes, I just noticed the small problem too, hopefully we mean the same
> bug ;)
Yeap, the same one. I thought it was the second patch instead of the
third. :)
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-02 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-31 10:21 Tejun Heo
2011-08-31 10:21 ` [PATCH pm-freezer 2/4] freezer: set PF_NOFREEZE on a dying task right before TASK_DEAD " Tejun Heo
2011-08-31 10:22 ` [PATCH pm-freezer 3/4] freezer: restructure __refrigerator() Tejun Heo
2011-08-31 10:22 ` [PATCH pm-freezer 4/4] freezer: use lock_task_sighand() in fake_signal_wake_up() Tejun Heo
2011-09-02 17:08 ` [PATCH pm-freezer 3/4] freezer: restructure __refrigerator() Oleg Nesterov
2011-08-31 18:08 ` [PATCH pm-freezer 1/4] cgroup_freezer: fix freezer->state setting bug in freezer_change_state() Oleg Nesterov
2011-09-02 0:42 ` Matt Helsley
2011-09-02 2:50 ` Tejun Heo
2011-09-02 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-09-02 17:08 ` Tejun Heo
2011-09-02 17:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-09-02 17:31 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-09-02 17:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-09-02 18:31 ` Matt Helsley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-29 14:04 Tejun Heo
2011-08-29 16:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110902173127.GA3083@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=matthltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paulmenage.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome