lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [ 032/173] cgroup: cgroup_subsys->fork() should be called after the task is added to css_set
    From
    Date
    On Tue, 2013-01-01 at 22:31 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
    > Hi Ben,
    >
    > At Fri, 28 Dec 2012 20:04:02 +0100,
    > Ben Hutchings wrote:
    > >
    > > 3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
    > >
    > > ------------------
    > >
    > > From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
    > >
    > > commit 5edee61edeaaebafe584f8fb7074c1ef4658596b upstream.
    [...]
    > I failed to compile 3.2.36-rc1 with my x86_64 box with enabling cgroup.
    >
    > build log:
    > ===============================================================================
    > ...
    > CC kernel/cgroup.o
    > kernel/cgroup.c: In function ‘cgroup_post_fork’:
    > kernel/cgroup.c:4540:5: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘ss->fork’ from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
    > kernel/cgroup.c:4540:5: note: expected ‘struct cgroup_subsys *’ but argument is of type ‘struct task_struct *’
    > kernel/cgroup.c:4540:5: error: too few arguments to function ‘ss->fork’
    > make[2]: *** [kernel/cgroup.o] Error 1
    > make[1]: *** [kernel] Error 2
    > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/sat/src/linux-stable'
    > make: *** [debian/stamp/build/kernel] Error 2
    > ===============================================================================
    >
    > It comes from the ss->fork()'s API change introduced by commit 761b3ef50e1c2.
    [...]
    > I found you mentioned this difference in the desctiption as follows.
    >
    > > - cgroup_subsys::fork takes cgroup_subsys pointer as first parameter]
    >
    > I guess you attached the wrong patch, or you forgot to modify the
    > original patch. Here is the correct patch for the latter case. It just
    > change "ss->fork(child)" to "ss->fork(ss, child)" as your description.
    [...]

    The correct version is in the combined patch, but I somehow missed
    refreshing this individual patch. Thanks for pointing this out.

    Ben.

    --
    Ben Hutchings
    It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-01-01 16:01    [W:4.179 / U:0.588 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site