From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: lizefan@huawei.com, paul@paulmenage.org, glommer@parallels.com,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, mhocko@suse.cz, bsingharora@gmail.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] cpuset: decouple cpuset locking from cgroup core, take#2
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:12:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50EA8355.5080007@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1357248967-24959-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
(2013/01/04 6:35), Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, guys.
>
> This is the second attempt at decoupling cpuset locking from cgroup
> core. Changes from the last take[L] are
>
> * cpuset-drop-async_rebuild_sched_domains.patch moved from 0007 to
> 0009. This reordering makes cpu hotplug handling async first and
> removes the temporary cyclic locking dependency.
>
> * 0006-cpuset-cleanup-cpuset-_can-_attach.patch no longer converts
> cpumask_var_t to cpumask_t as per Rusty Russell.
>
> * 0008-cpuset-don-t-nest-cgroup_mutex-inside-get_online_cpu.patch now
> synchronously rebuilds sched domains from cpu hotplug callback.
> This fixes various issues caused by confused scheduler puttings
> tasks into a dead cpu including the RCU stall problem reported by Li
> Zefan.
>
> Original patchset description follows.
>
> 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?
>
Okay...but If Costa has a new version of his patch, I'd like to see it.
I'm sorry if I missed his new patches for removing cgroup_lock.
Thanks,
-Kame
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-07 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-03 21:35 Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:35 ` [PATCH 01/13] cpuset: remove unused cpuset_unlock() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:35 ` [PATCH 02/13] cpuset: remove fast exit path from remove_tasks_in_empty_cpuset() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:35 ` [PATCH 03/13] cpuset: introduce ->css_on/offline() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:35 ` [PATCH 04/13] cpuset: introduce CS_ONLINE Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:35 ` [PATCH 05/13] cpuset: introduce cpuset_for_each_child() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 06/13] cpuset: cleanup cpuset[_can]_attach() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 07/13] cpuset: reorganize CPU / memory hotplug handling Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 08/13] cpuset: don't nest cgroup_mutex inside get_online_cpus() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 09/13] cpuset: drop async_rebuild_sched_domains() Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 10/13] cpuset: make CPU / memory hotplug propagation asynchronous Tejun Heo
2013-01-06 8:29 ` Li Zefan
2013-01-07 16:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 11/13] cpuset: pin down cpus and mems while a task is being attached Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 12/13] cpuset: schedule hotplug propagation from cpuset_attach() if the cpuset is empty Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 21:36 ` [PATCH 13/13] cpuset: replace cgroup_mutex locking with cpuset internal locking Tejun Heo
2013-01-06 8:27 ` [PATCHSET] cpuset: decouple cpuset locking from cgroup core, take#2 Li Zefan
2013-01-07 16:44 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-08 1:31 ` Li Zefan
2013-01-09 18:57 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-11 9:05 ` Li Zefan
2013-01-09 19:32 ` Paul Menage
2013-01-07 8:12 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki [this message]
2013-01-09 9:46 ` Glauber Costa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50EA8355.5080007@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=paul@paulmenage.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox