Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy: fix sleeping function called from invalid context

[David Rientjes]

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Li Zefan wrote:

> > Yes, the rcu lock is not providing protection for any critical section 
> > here that requires (1) the forker's cpuset to be stored in 
> > cpuset_being_rebound or (2) the forked thread's cpuset to be rebound by 
> > the cpuset nodemask update, and no race involving the two.
> >
> 
> Yes, this is a long-standing issue. Besides the race you described, the child
> task's mems_allowed can be wrong if the cpuset's nodemask changes before the
> child has been added to the cgroup's tasklist.
> 
> I remember Tejun once said he wanted to disallow task migration between
> cgroups during fork, and that should fix this problem.
>  

Ok, I don't want to fix it in cpusets if cgroups will eventually prevent 
it, so I need an understanding of the long term plan.  Will cgroups 
continue to allow migration during fork(), Tejun?

> > It needs to be slightly rewritten to work properly without negatively 
> > impacting the latency of fork().  Do you have the cycles to do it?
> > 
> 
> Sounds you have other idea?
> 

It wouldn't be too difficult with a cgroup post fork callback into the 
cpuset code to rebind the nodemask if it has changed, but with my above 
concern those might be yanked out eventually :)
--
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/