Liu Aleaxander wrote: > From: Liu Aleaxander <Aleaxander@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:27:06 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] Fixes the un-paired cgroup lock problem > > In cgroup_lock_live_group, it locks the cgroup by mutex_lock, while in the > cgroup_tasks_write, it unlock it by cgroup_unlock. Even though they are > equal, but I do think we should make it pair. > > BTW, should we replace others with cgroup_lock and cgroup_unlock? > Since we already have a wrapper one and it's meaningful. > Before I read the email body, I thought there is a bug where there is a lock without unlock or vise versa. I agree the case here can be called "unpaired", but I'm not convinced this patch is needed. The code is not buggy or confusing. So the patch neither fixes a bug nor make the code more readable. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
