On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 08:54:50PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
> Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
>
> Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 processes in one freezer cgroup, which is
> freezing:
>
> CPU 0 CPU 1
>
03.08.2016 19:36, Jeff Layton пишет:
On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 20:54 +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 processes in one freezer cgroup,
which is
freezing:
CPU 0 CPU 1
-
04.08.2016 15:16, Jeff Layton пишет:
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 12:55 +0200, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
03.08.2016 19:36, Jeff Layton пишет:
On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 20:54 +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
Here is a deadlock scheme for
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 12:55 +0200, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>
> 03.08.2016 19:36, Jeff Layton пишет:
> >
> > On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 20:54 +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
> > >
> > > Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
> > >
> > > Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 pr
Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 processes in one freezer cgroup, which is
freezing:
CPU 0 CPU 1
do_last
inode_lock(dir->d_inode)
vfs_create
nfs_create
...
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 20:54 +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>> Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
>>
>> Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 processes in one freezer cgroup,
>> which is
>> freezing:
>>
>> CPU 0
On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 20:54 +0400, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
> Otherwise freezer cgroup state might never become "FROZEN".
>
> Here is a deadlock scheme for 2 processes in one freezer cgroup,
> which is
> freezing:
>
> CPU 0 CPU 1
>