lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHSET cgroup/for-3.8] cpuset: decouple cpuset locking from cgroup core
(2012/11/29 6:34), Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, guys.
>
> Depending on cgroup core locking - cgroup_mutex - is messy and makes
> cgroup prone to locking dependency problems. The current code already
> has lock dependency loop - memcg nests get_online_cpus() inside
> cgroup_mutex. cpuset the other way around.
>
> Regardless of the locking details, whatever is protecting cgroup has
> inherently to be something outer to most other locking constructs.
> cgroup calls into a lot of major subsystems which in turn have to
> perform subsystem-specific locking. Trying to nest cgroup
> synchronization inside other locks isn't something which can work
> well.
>
> cgroup now has enough API to allow subsystems to implement their own
> locking and cgroup_mutex is scheduled to be made private to cgroup
> core. This patchset makes cpuset implement its own locking instead of
> relying on cgroup_mutex.
>
> cpuset is rather nasty in this respect. Some of it seems to have come
> from the implementation history - cgroup core grew out of cpuset - but
> big part stems from cpuset's need to migrate tasks to an ancestor
> cgroup when an hotunplug event makes a cpuset empty (w/o any cpu or
> memory).
>
> This patchset decouples cpuset locking from cgroup_mutex. After the
> patchset, cpuset uses cpuset-specific cpuset_mutex instead of
> cgroup_mutex. This also removes the lockdep warning triggered during
> cpu offlining (see 0009).
>
> Note that this leaves memcg as the only external user of cgroup_mutex.
> Michal, Kame, can you guys please convert memcg to use its own locking
> too?
>

Hmm. let me see....at quick glance cgroup_lock() is used at
hierarchy policy change
kmem_limit
migration policy change
swapiness change
oom control

Because all aboves takes care of changes in hierarchy,
Having a new memcg's mutex in ->create() may be a way.

Ah, hm, Costa is mentioning task-attach. is the task-attach problem in memcg ?

Thanks,
-Kame











> This patchset contains the following thirteen patches.
>
> 0001-cpuset-remove-unused-cpuset_unlock.patch
> 0002-cpuset-remove-fast-exit-path-from-remove_tasks_in_em.patch
> 0003-cpuset-introduce-css_on-offline.patch
> 0004-cpuset-introduce-CS_ONLINE.patch
> 0005-cpuset-introduce-cpuset_for_each_child.patch
> 0006-cpuset-cleanup-cpuset-_can-_attach.patch
> 0007-cpuset-drop-async_rebuild_sched_domains.patch
> 0008-cpuset-reorganize-CPU-memory-hotplug-handling.patch
> 0009-cpuset-don-t-nest-cgroup_mutex-inside-get_online_cpu.patch
> 0010-cpuset-make-CPU-memory-hotplug-propagation-asynchron.patch
> 0011-cpuset-pin-down-cpus-and-mems-while-a-task-is-being-.patch
> 0012-cpuset-schedule-hotplug-propagation-from-cpuset_atta.patch
> 0013-cpuset-replace-cgroup_mutex-locking-with-cpuset-inte.patch
>
> 0001-0006 are prep patches.
>
> 0007-0009 make cpuset nest get_online_cpus() inside cgroup_mutex, not
> the other way around.
>
> 0010-0012 plug holes which would be exposed by switching to
> cpuset-specific locking.
>
> 0013 replaces cgroup_mutex with cpuset_mutex.
>
> This patchset is on top of cgroup/for-3.8 (fddfb02ad0) and also
> available in the following git branch.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git review-cpuset-locking
>
> diffstat follows.
>
> kernel/cpuset.c | 750 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 file changed, 423 insertions(+), 327 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun
>
> --
> 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: 2012-11-30 04:41    [W:0.357 / U:3.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site