linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/38] Remove struct mm_struct::exe

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 31 May 2009 15:19:53 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc:	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>, xemul@...allels.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/38] Remove struct mm_struct::exe_file et al

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 01:54:27 +0400 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:

> And BTW, there is something unnatural when executable path is attached
> to mm_struct(!) not task_struct,

mm_struct is the central object for a heavyweight process.  All threads
within that process share the same executable path (don't they?) so
attaching the executable path to the mm seems OK to me.

What I always find a bit weird is that an MM container is used as the
central point for a number of sched obects.  But it's logical, given
that the never-before-stated definition of a heavyweight process is
"thing which share a VM".
--
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/