On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 19d5d4274e22..55e6731ebcd5 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1687,7 +1687,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct task_struct *p)
> * protects memcg_name and makes sure that parallel ooms do not
> * interleave
> */
> - static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(oom_info_lock);
> + static DEFINE_MUTEX(oom_info_lock);
> struct cgroup *task_cgrp;
> struct cgroup *mem_cgrp;
> static char memcg_name[PATH_MAX];
> @@ -1698,7 +1698,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct task_struct *p)
> if (!p)
> return;
>
> - spin_lock(&oom_info_lock);
> + mutex_lock(&oom_info_lock);
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> mem_cgrp = memcg->css.cgroup;
> @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ done:
>
> pr_cont("\n");
> }
> - spin_unlock(&oom_info_lock);
> + mutex_unlock(&oom_info_lock);
> }
>
> /*
Can we change oom_info_lock() to only protecting memcg_name and forget
about interleaving the hierarchical memcg stats instead?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>