On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 04:08:10PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi
wrote:
> Well, if I've got correctly your comment in the previous message, I
> would say that at this stage we don't need RCU looks at all.
Agreed.
> Reason being that cpu_util_update_eff() gets called only from
> cpu_uclamp_write() which
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 17:11:53 +0100, Michal Koutný wrote...
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 10:08:49AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi
> wrote:
>> @@ -7095,6 +7149,7 @@ static ssize_t cpu_uclamp_write(struct
>> kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
>> if (req.ret)
>> return req.ret;
>>
>>
On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 10:08:49AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi
wrote:
> @@ -7095,6 +7149,7 @@ static ssize_t cpu_uclamp_write(struct kernfs_open_file
> *of, char *buf,
> if (req.ret)
> return req.ret;
>
> + mutex_lock(&uclamp_mutex);
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> tg =
In order to properly support hierarchical resources control, the cgroup
delegation model requires that attribute writes from a child group never
fail but still are locally consistent and constrained based on parent's
assigned resources. This requires to properly propagate and aggregate
parent attri
4 matches
Mail list logo
