Hello,

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 05:39:03PM +0000, Roman Gushchin wrote:

Yeah, it's a good point. I've thought about it mostly in the fork() context,
where if freezing of a cgroup races with fork(), it makes no sense to
switch the cgroup state back and forth. But that case is different, as
the child will be trapped just on the return path from fork() call.

I think it'd be best to tie the task counter transitions to cgroup
state update and propagation so that the state is always reflective of
the task states.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun