On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 02:27:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 17:31 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> > with CONFIG_PROVE_RCU, a warning can be triggered when we
> > resume from suspend:
> >
> > ...
> > include/linux/cgroup.h:533 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without
> > protection!
> > ...
> >
> > task_freezer() calls task_subsys_state(), which needs to be
> > protected by rcu_read_lock or cgroup_mutex.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <l...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/cgroup_freezer.c | 2 ++
> > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/cgroup_freezer.c b/kernel/cgroup_freezer.c
> > index 5038f4c..ac76983 100644
> > --- a/kernel/cgroup_freezer.c
> > +++ b/kernel/cgroup_freezer.c
> > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ int cgroup_freezing_or_frozen(struct task_struct *task)
> > struct freezer *freezer;
> > enum freezer_state state;
> >
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > task_lock(task);
> > freezer = task_freezer(task);
> > if (!freezer->css.cgroup->parent)
> > @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ int cgroup_freezing_or_frozen(struct task_struct *task)
> > else
> > state = freezer->state;
> > task_unlock(task);
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> > return (state == CGROUP_FREEZING) || (state == CGROUP_FROZEN);
> > }
>
> Hmm cgroup_attach_task() does hold task_lock() over setting
> tsk->cgroups, so doesn't that also pin the task to the cgroup and thus
> the cgroup itself?
So you are advocating for the rcu_dereference check including the
task lock, correct?
Thanx, Paul
_______________________________________________
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
