From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH cgroup/for-3.10] cgroup: make cgroup_mutex outer to threadgroup_lock
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:03:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130320150351.GW3042@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <514909A0.4030808@huawei.com>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:58:08AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> On 2013/3/20 6:02, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > It doesn't make sense to nest cgroup_mutex inside threadgroup_lock
> > when it should be outer to most all locks used by all cgroup
> > controllers. It was nested inside threadgroup_lock only because some
> > controllers were abusing cgroup_mutex inside controllers leading to
> > locking order inversion.
> >
> > cgroup_mutex is no longer abused by controllers and can be put outer
> > to threadgroup_lock. Reverse the locking order in
> > attach_task_by_pid().
> >
>
> But the code contrast to the changelog. ;)
>
> cgroup_mutex is currently outside of threadgroup_lock, and you're making
> it nested inside threadgroup_lock in the code.
Heh heh, thanks for spotting my idiocy. Yeah, the locking order
between the two has been swapped a couple times while writing up the
original threadgroup_lock patch and I misremembered how it was at the
end and got totally confused when writing this patch. Sorry about
that. So, let's leave the locking in cgroup alone. I like
cgroup_mutex to be the outer one.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-20 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 22:36 lockdep trace from prepare_bprm_creds Dave Jones
2013-03-07 17:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-07 18:01 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 18:03 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 19:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-07 19:38 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-09 2:11 ` Li Zefan
2013-03-09 3:29 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-09 7:47 ` Li Zefan
2013-03-09 20:00 ` [PATCH 0/1] do not abuse ->cred_guard_mutex in threadgroup_lock() Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-09 20:01 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-09 20:15 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-11 1:50 ` Li Zefan
2013-03-21 16:21 ` [PATCH] " Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-21 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-22 13:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-19 22:02 ` [PATCH cgroup/for-3.10] cgroup: make cgroup_mutex outer to threadgroup_lock Tejun Heo
2013-03-20 0:58 ` Li Zefan
2013-03-20 15:03 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-03-20 18:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-20 18:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-21 16:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-07 18:21 ` lockdep trace from prepare_bprm_creds Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 18:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-07 19:33 ` Tejun Heo
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=20130320150351.GW3042@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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