Re: [PATCH] memcg: change oom_info_lock to mutex

[David Rientjes]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 19d5d4274e22..55e6731ebcd5 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1687,7 +1687,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct task_struct *p)
>  	 * protects memcg_name and makes sure that parallel ooms do not
>  	 * interleave
>  	 */
> -	static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(oom_info_lock);
> +	static DEFINE_MUTEX(oom_info_lock);
>  	struct cgroup *task_cgrp;
>  	struct cgroup *mem_cgrp;
>  	static char memcg_name[PATH_MAX];
> @@ -1698,7 +1698,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct task_struct *p)
>  	if (!p)
>  		return;
>  
> -	spin_lock(&oom_info_lock);
> +	mutex_lock(&oom_info_lock);
>  	rcu_read_lock();
>  
>  	mem_cgrp = memcg->css.cgroup;
> @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ done:
>  
>  		pr_cont("\n");
>  	}
> -	spin_unlock(&oom_info_lock);
> +	mutex_unlock(&oom_info_lock);
>  }
>  
>  /*

Can we change oom_info_lock() to only protecting memcg_name and forget 
about interleaving the hierarchical memcg stats instead?
--
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/