Re: [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code

[Srivatsa Vaddagiri]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:22AM -0800, menage@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> +/**
> + * container_lock - lock out any changes to container structures
> + *
> + * The out of memory (oom) code needs to mutex_lock containers
> + * from being changed while it scans the tasklist looking for a
> + * task in an overlapping container.

Which specific portion of oom code cares abt container structure being
intact? 

If I understand correctly, only cpuset requires this double locking.
More specifically, cpusets cares about walking cpuset->parent list
safely with callback_mutex held correct?

If that is the case, I think we can push container_lock entirely inside 
cpuset.c and not have others exposed to this double-lock complexity.
This is possible because cpuset.c (build on top of containers) still has
cpuset->parent and walking cpuset->parent list safely can be made
possible with a second lock which is local to only cpuset.c.

-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/