[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1305590200.2503.48.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:56:40 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 16:10 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 23:54 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > > In my attempt to clean up unprotected comm access, I've noticed
> > > most comm access is done for printk output. To simplify correct
> > > locking in these cases, I've introduced a new %ptc format,
> > > which will print the corresponding task's comm.
> > > Example use:
> > > printk("%ptc: unaligned epc - sending SIGBUS.\n", current);
> > > diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
[]
> > > +static noinline_for_stack
> > Actually, why noinline? Did your previous version have there some
> > TASK_COMM_LEN buffer or anything on stack which is not there anymore?
> No, I was just following how almost all of the pointer() called
> functions were declared.
> But with two pointers and a long, I add more then ip6_string() has on
> the stack, which uses the same notation.
> But I can drop that bit if there's really no need for it.
vsprintf can be recursive, I think you should keep it.
--
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