lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: + c-r-prctl-add-ability-to-set-new-mm_struct-exe_file-update-after-mm- num_exe_file_vmas-removal.patch added to -mm tree
On 04/20, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
> Guys, while I more-less agree with Matt about single-shot behaviour
>
> [ let me copy my and his email
>
> >> With mm->exe_file this prctl option become a one-shot
> >> only, and while at moment our user-space tool can perfectly
> >> live with that I thought that there is no strict need to
> >> limit the option this way from the very beginning.
> >>
> > As far as backward compatibility, isn't it better to lift that restriction
> > later rather than add it? I think the latter would very likely "break"
> > things whereas the former would not.
> >
> > I also prefer that restriction because it establishes a bound on how
> > frequently the symlink can change. Keeping it a one-shot deal makes the
> > values that show up in tools like top more reliable for admins.
> ]
>
> I guess maybe it's time to drop one-shot requirement and as result
> we can drop MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED bit completely,

Plus perhaps we can remove this for_each_vma check?

> making overall code
> simplier?

Personally I'd certainly prefer this ;)



But let me repeat to avoid the confusion. I am fine either way,
I am not going to discuss this again unless I see something which
looks technically wrong. And the current MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED
doesn't look right even if the problem is minor.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-20 00:13    [W:0.439 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site