From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422935AbcBZUPJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:15:09 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0205.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.205]:33705 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754744AbcBZUPH (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:15:07 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,rostedt@goodmis.org,:::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:968:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2895:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3350:3622:3865:3866:3870:3871:3872:3874:4419:5007:6120:6261:7875:7903:10004:10400:10848:10967:11026:11232:11658:11914:12050:12296:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:14659:21060:21080:30041:30054:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: run20_6685dd4c0e630 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1608 Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:15:03 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Shi, Yang" Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, tj@kernel.org, lizefan@huawei.com, tglx@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kernfs: create raw version kernfs_path_len and kernfs_path Message-ID: <20160226151503.39d39e45@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <56D0AEAC.3070002@linaro.org> References: <1456510505-6620-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linaro.org> <20160226135628.09ce727c@gandalf.local.home> <56D0A97E.90706@linaro.org> <56D0AEAC.3070002@linaro.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 11:59:40 -0800 "Shi, Yang" wrote: > BTW, it sounds this is not the only point where kernfs_node could be > updated, __kernfs_remove should need synchronize_sched too. > Question is, can the kernfs of a cgroup be removed while the cgroup is still active? I don't see the kernfs_rename_lock being held anywhere in that remove. If it can be an issue there with this patch, then it's an issue today, because the kernfs_mutex is not held by the tracepoint. -- Steve