On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 07:49:17PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote: > Most of the destroy functions are only doing very simple things > like freeing memory. > > The ones who goes through lists and such, already use its own > locking for those. > > * The cgroup itself won't go away until we free it, (after destroy) > * The parent won't go away because we hold a reference count > * There are no more tasks in the cgroup, and the cgroup is declared > dead (cgroup_is_removed() == true) > > For the blk-cgroup and the cpusets, I got the impression that the mutex > is still necessary. > > For those, I grabbed it from within the destroy function itself. > > If the maintainer for those subsystems consider it safe to remove > it, we can discuss it separately. I really don't like cgroup_lock() usage spreading more. It's something which should be contained in cgroup.c proper. I looked at the existing users a while ago and they seemed to be compensating deficencies in API, so, if at all possible, let's not spread the disease. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
