Commit 3bc449ed by Serge Hallyn

lxccontainer: update locking comment

Update the LOCKING comment. Take mem_lock in want_daemonize. convert lxcapi_destroy to not use privlock/slock by hand. Fix a coverity-found potential dereference of NULL c->lxc_conf. api_cgroup_get_item() and api_cgroup_set_item(): use disklock, not memlock, since the values are set through the cgroup fs on the running container. Signed-off-by: 's avatarSerge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com> Acked-by: 's avatarStéphane Graber <stgraber@ubuntu.com>
parent 73e608b2
......@@ -145,11 +145,11 @@ void remove_partial(struct lxc_container *c, int fd)
}
/* LOCKING
* 1. c->privlock protects the struct lxc_container from multiple threads.
* 2. c->slock protects the on-disk container data
* 3. thread_mutex protects process data (ex: fd table) from multiple threads
* slock is an flock, which does not exclude threads. Therefore slock should
* always be wrapped inside privlock.
* 1. container_mem_lock(c) protects the struct lxc_container from multiple threads.
* 2. container_disk_lock(c) protects the on-disk container data - in particular the
* container configuration file.
* The container_disk_lock also takes the container_mem_lock.
* 3. thread_mutex protects process data (ex: fd table) from multiple threads.
* NOTHING mutexes two independent programs with their own struct
* lxc_container for the same c->name, between API calls. For instance,
* c->config_read(); c->start(); Between those calls, data on disk
......@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ void remove_partial(struct lxc_container *c, int fd)
* due to hung callers. So I prefer to keep the locks only within our own
* functions, not across functions.
*
* If you're going to fork while holding a lxccontainer, increment
* If you're going to clone while holding a lxccontainer, increment
* c->numthreads (under privlock) before forking. When deleting,
* decrement numthreads under privlock, then if it hits 0 you can delete.
* Do not ever use a lxccontainer whose numthreads you did not bump.
......@@ -406,7 +406,12 @@ static void lxcapi_want_daemonize(struct lxc_container *c)
{
if (!c)
return;
if (!container_mem_lock(c)) {
ERROR("Error getting mem lock");
return;
}
c->daemonize = 1;
container_mem_unlock(c);
}
static bool lxcapi_wait(struct lxc_container *c, const char *state, int timeout)
......@@ -1218,12 +1223,8 @@ static bool lxcapi_destroy(struct lxc_container *c)
if (!c || !lxcapi_is_defined(c))
return false;
if (lxclock(c->privlock, 0))
return false;
if (lxclock(c->slock, 0)) {
lxcunlock(c->privlock);
if (container_disk_lock(c))
return false;
}
if (!is_stopped(c)) {
// we should queue some sort of error - in c->error_string?
......@@ -1231,7 +1232,7 @@ static bool lxcapi_destroy(struct lxc_container *c)
goto out;
}
if (c->lxc_conf->rootfs.path && c->lxc_conf->rootfs.mount)
if (c->lxc_conf && c->lxc_conf->rootfs.path && c->lxc_conf->rootfs.mount)
r = bdev_init(c->lxc_conf->rootfs.path, c->lxc_conf->rootfs.mount, NULL);
if (r) {
if (r->ops->destroy(r) < 0) {
......@@ -1250,8 +1251,7 @@ static bool lxcapi_destroy(struct lxc_container *c)
ret = true;
out:
lxcunlock(c->privlock);
lxcunlock(c->slock);
container_disk_unlock(c);
return ret;
}
......@@ -1374,42 +1374,38 @@ err:
static bool lxcapi_set_cgroup_item(struct lxc_container *c, const char *subsys, const char *value)
{
int ret;
bool b = false;
if (!c)
return false;
if (container_mem_lock(c))
if (is_stopped(c))
return false;
if (is_stopped(c))
goto err;
if (container_disk_lock(c))
return false;
ret = lxc_cgroup_set(c->name, subsys, value, c->config_path);
if (!ret)
b = true;
err:
container_mem_unlock(c);
return b;
ret = lxc_cgroup_set(c->name, subsys, value, c->config_path) == 0;
container_disk_unlock(c);
return ret == 0;
}
static int lxcapi_get_cgroup_item(struct lxc_container *c, const char *subsys, char *retv, int inlen)
{
int ret = -1;
int ret;
if (!c || !c->lxc_conf)
return -1;
if (container_mem_lock(c))
if (is_stopped(c))
return -1;
if (is_stopped(c))
goto out;
if (container_disk_lock(c))
return -1;
ret = lxc_cgroup_get(c->name, subsys, retv, inlen, c->config_path);
out:
container_mem_unlock(c);
container_disk_unlock(c);
return ret;
}
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment