Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Tue, 28 May 2013 22:22:12 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] proc: first_tid() fix/cleanup |
| |
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
> Hello. > > next_thread() should be avoided, probably next_tid() is the > only "valid" user. > > But now we have another reason to avoid (and probably even kill) > it, we are going to replace or fix while_each_thread(), almost > every lockless usage is wrong. > > I was going to send more changes, but this initial series nearly > killed me. And I think first_tid() needs another cleanup, ->f_pos > truncation doesn't look nice, tomorrow.
I have made some comments but overall this looks like a good set of cleanups.
Reviewed-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
As for f_pos truncation if you want you can safely check if f_pos is greater than PID_MAX_LIMIT as we will never more threads than we have pids.
Eric
| |