On 10/22/07, Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Using cgroup_mutex is certainly possible for now, although more > heavy-weight than I'd like long term. Using css_get isn't the right > approach, I think - we shouldn't be able to cause an rmdir to fail due > to a concurrent read. > OK, the obvious solution is to use the same approach for subsystem state objects as we do for the struct cgroup itself - move the calls to the subsystem destroy methods to cgroup_diput. A control file dentry will keep alive the parent dir's dentry, which will keep alive the cgroup and (with this change) the subsystem state objects too. The only potential drawback that I can see is that an open fd on a cgroup directory or a control file will keep more memory alive than it would have done previously. Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
