On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 08:03:19PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > We don't need to hold the parent task_lock() on the > parent in cgroup_fork() because we are already synchronized > against the two places that may change the parent css_set > concurrently: > > - cgroup_exit(), but the parent obviously can't exit concurrently > - cgroup migration: we are synchronized against threadgroup_lock() > > So we can safely remove the task_lock() there. > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Containers <containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Cgroups <cgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Paul Menage <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Applied both patches to cgroup/for-3.3 and pushed out to linux-next. Thank you. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
