On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:55:18AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > > Thanks Tejun and Hugh. Sorry for my late entry in getting around to > > testing this fix. On the surface it sounds correct however I'd like to > > test this on top of 3.10.* since that is what we'll likely be running. > > I've tried to apply Hugh's patch above on top of 3.10.19 but it > > appears there are a number of conflicts. Looking over the changes and > > my understanding of the problem I believe on 3.10 only the > > cgroup_free_fn needs to be run in a separate workqueue. Below is the > > patch I've applied on top of 3.10.19, which I'm about to start > > testing. If it looks like I botched the backport in any way please > > let me know so I can test a propper fix on top of 3.10.19. > > > > You didn't move css free_work to the dedicate wq as Tejun's patch does. > css free_work won't acquire cgroup_mutex, but when destroying a lot of > cgroups, we can have a lot of css free_work in the workqueue, so I'd > suggest you also use cgroup_destroy_wq for it. Well, I didn't move the css free_work, but I did test the patch I posted on top of 3.10.19 and I am unable to reproduce the lockup so it appears my patch was sufficient for 3.10.*. Hopefully we can get this fix applied and backported into stable. Thanks, Shawn -- 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
