Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c8b:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v11csp2303284pja; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:37:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz/lUAy4cITRms8a/hKhatJHv7CVbDunMa8pywziIbmaGYEYw1wKsRJFlWwWrbrdW1mQeXk X-Received: by 2002:a65:4048:: with SMTP id h8mr5232369pgp.6.1555699026153; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:37:06 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1555699026; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=vgb+MlgPxr7OVp4dkzNGqhQ3N1a5ibDpIu3s6T2tDB/sY5nWod3Bkvp2/X/tDcI7BU Zt9SoCitv6eJzYYLLp6F6W+BI2vShRCu1PMzfdsPfVq/ueHJYtm/DgaCXzhrBKv9mKF/ nBu3qBMk7whyK72Jxcq69BaXipBWvT55HQxjfOkj7vIJ3l6HdpgZP9RFg+ctY06/TdnR Qqi0DTdppnJLpJWbB3wK9jWjfwspCwe3TM5vxTyWfRCn12AJhzWRK9rE8uDPukXTbzJ8 8y8VvvnkfjjjutudTjJirXIxikK1UzCUrglU9TA5AbEupOwC326FhzA73GE52zgkncgv xMyA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=A8DuVAab+lN0lSD9JJvpc0bu38uSwFd2eBTAubM37z0=; b=stAlByu6aigzCOHVnT3Vc02kDRDTXEcgEQNmTgWjI9E0I6OuzSbfRIB5Ni0JHHSWHa UiCeZKuN+X7IJGf+l8LHMrDmA7yWuHc047eRViXdtVOpfYD/oIrb7eZLZQhSeTrI66yP XpI8gLnAmJuu+WIyCAAxh1UqITrGpfCdxRm4VDn7gLdn2KScgXqdpjaNqzaP34/qFG88 6AJdVcwMtA5PPTJopN+qXA+sLGpshO+d+4Qce43DYDvyOipUV/iM4J1lIuMEdgq8eCNa RNfdrvBwuRLJ85PmCjWFrfqRirZOknOYsggn8qDfq+5JrVx7J+00C4BOMRUvBvWUZcyU Znuw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g97si4171049plb.70.2019.04.19.11.36.50; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727648AbfDSSeI (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 19 Apr 2019 14:34:08 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48636 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728307AbfDSSeF (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Apr 2019 14:34:05 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23C5A301EA92; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 16:08:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.43.17.38]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CDDEF1001DCC; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 16:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:08:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:08:06 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Tejun Heo , kernel-team@fb.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/9] cgroup: cgroup v2 freezer Message-ID: <20190419160806.GA12790@redhat.com> References: <20190405174708.1010-1-guro@fb.com> <20190405174708.1010-5-guro@fb.com> <20190419151912.GA12152@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190419151912.GA12152@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.47]); Fri, 19 Apr 2019 16:08:09 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Anyway, I do not want to delay this feature. Even if I am right we can cleanup this code later. I see nothing really wrong, so no objections from me. Sorry for delay. On 04/19, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 04/05, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > > +void cgroup_leave_frozen(bool always_leave) > > +{ > > + struct cgroup *cgrp; > > + > > + spin_lock_irq(&css_set_lock); > > + cgrp = task_dfl_cgroup(current); > > + if (always_leave || !test_bit(CGRP_FREEZE, &cgrp->flags)) { > > + cgroup_dec_frozen_cnt(cgrp); > > + cgroup_update_frozen(cgrp); > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!current->frozen); > > + current->frozen = false; > > + } > > + spin_unlock_irq(&css_set_lock); > > + > > + if (unlikely(current->frozen)) { > > + /* > > + * If the task remained in the frozen state, > > + * make sure it won't reach userspace without > > + * entering the signal handling loop. > > + */ > > + spin_lock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock); > > + recalc_sigpending(); > > + spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock); > > I still can't understand this logic. > > Once again, suppose we race with CGRP_FREEZE. If JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE is already > set then signal_pending() must be already T and we do not need recalc_sigpending? > If JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE is not set yet, how can recalc_sigpending() help? > > > +static void cgroup_freeze_task(struct task_struct *task, bool freeze) > > +{ > > + unsigned long flags; > > + > > + /* If the task is about to die, don't bother with freezing it. */ > > + if (!lock_task_sighand(task, &flags)) > > + return; > > + > > + if (freeze) { > > + task->jobctl |= JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE; > > + signal_wake_up(task, false); > > + } else { > > + task->jobctl &= ~JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE; > > + wake_up_process(task); > > wake_up_interruptible() ? > > > static int ptrace_signal(int signr, kernel_siginfo_t *info) > > { > > /* > > @@ -2442,6 +2483,10 @@ bool get_signal(struct ksignal *ksig) > > ksig->info.si_signo = signr = SIGKILL; > > sigdelset(¤t->pending.signal, SIGKILL); > > recalc_sigpending(); > > + current->jobctl &= ~JOBCTL_TRAP_FREEZE; > > + spin_unlock_irq(&sighand->siglock); > > + if (unlikely(cgroup_task_frozen(current))) > > + cgroup_leave_frozen(true); > > Oh, and another leave_frozen below... > > I feel this must be simplified somehow, but nothing comes to my mind right now. > > > + /* > > + * If the task is leaving the frozen state, let's update > > + * cgroup counters and reset the frozen bit. > > + */ > > + if (unlikely(cgroup_task_frozen(current))) { > > spin_unlock_irq(&sighand->siglock); > > + cgroup_leave_frozen(true); > > goto relock; > > } > > afaics cgroup_leave_frozen(false) makes more sense here. > > Oleg.