OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 0/7] containers (V7): Generic Process Containers
Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code [message #11010 is a reply to message #10941] Sun, 11 March 2007 19:38 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Paul Jackson is currently offline  Paul Jackson
Messages: 157
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
vatsa wrote:
> Yes, that way only the hierarchy hosting cpusets takes the hit of
> double-locking. cpuset_subsys->create/destroy can take this additional lock
> inside cpuset.c.

The primary reason for the cpuset double locking, as I recall, was because
cpusets needs to access cpusets inside the memory allocator. A single,
straight forward, cpuset lock failed under the following common scenario:
1) user does cpuset system call (writes some file below /dev/cpuset, e.g.)
2) kernel cpuset code locks its lock
3) cpuset code asks to allocate some memory for some cpuset structure
4) memory allocator tries to lock the cpuset lock - deadlock!

The reason that the memory allocator needs the cpuset lock is to check
whether the memory nodes the current task is allowed to use have changed,
due to changes in the current tasks cpuset.

A secondary reason that the cpuset code needs two locks is because the
main cpuset lock is a long held, system wide lock, and various low
level bits of performance critical code sometimes require quick,
read-only access to cpusets.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH 2/3] powernow-k8: switch to *_on_cpu() functions
Next Topic: aufs on 64 bit nodes: warnings on compilation
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Sep 07 22:16:23 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.24525 seconds