[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090127191413.D488.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:15:52 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...radead.org>,
Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] export get_task_comm()
> > > It's worth a checkpatch rule, I guess: "direct access to
> > > task_struct.comm is racy - use get_task_comm()".
> >
> > And majority of usages is some debugging printk where nobody cares if ->comm
> > corrupted.
> >
> > Changelog says is useful for debugging. That's right, tsk->comm is useful
> > for debugging, not allocating temporary buffer + get_task_comm().
> >
> > Some ->comm usages are for kernel threads which never change it, for starters.
> >
> > current->comm is always safe, because, current is not executing prctl(2)!
>
> That's a good point.
>
> > I'd say nothing should be done and, heavens forbid, adding this to checkpatch.pl.
>
> hm, yeah, OK, I'll drop it.
Oh, I have to agree Alexey because he is always right ;)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists