* Xiaotian Feng <df...@redhat.com> [2009-07-21 18:25:26]:
> In cgroup_get_sb, the lock sequence is:
> mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
> mutex_lock(&cgroup->mutex);
> so the last unlock sequence should be:
> mutex_unlock(&cgroup->mutex);
> mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaotian Feng <df...@redhat.com>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup.c
> index 3737a68..11ef162 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup.c
> @@ -1140,8 +1140,8 @@ static int cgroup_get_sb(struct file_system_type
> *fs_type,
> BUG_ON(root->number_of_cgroups != 1);
>
> cgroup_populate_dir(root_cgrp);
> - mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
> mutex_unlock(&cgroup_mutex);
> + mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
> }
>
Seems reasonable to me. You might also want to mention that elsewhere
the sequence is unlock cgroup_mutex followed by inode->i_mutex.
Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bal...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
--
Balbir
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
