lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code
On 3/7/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> If that is the case, I think we can push container_lock entirely inside
> cpuset.c and not have others exposed to this double-lock complexity.
> This is possible because cpuset.c (build on top of containers) still has
> cpuset->parent and walking cpuset->parent list safely can be made
> possible with a second lock which is local to only cpuset.c.
>

The callback mutex (which is what container_lock() actually locks) is
also used to synchronize fork/exit against subsystem additions, in the
event that some subsystem has registered fork or exit callbacks. We
could probably have a separate subsystem_mutex for that instead.

Apart from that, yes, it may well be possible to move callback lock
entirely inside cpusets.

Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-07 21:53    [W:0.142 / U:1.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site