[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E616122.3030901@ixiacom.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 16:05:06 -0700
From: Earl Chew <echew@...acom.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 v2]: coredump: use current->group_leader->comm instead
of current->comm
Oleg, Alan,
> Who knows? But once again, we use ->comm in the very unlikely case.
>
> And let me repeat just in case. I do not argue, I agree either way.
I understand.
Before I give thought to reworking the change, perhaps some other
considerations.
The other interesting thing is that Alan brought up the relevant point
about stuff breaking.
Alan Cox wrote:
> Earl wrote:
>> Change corepattern %e and %E to use current->group_leader->comm instead of current->comm.
>
> Which might break stuff.
What are your thoughts regarding the introduction of cn_escape() in this patch ?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/6/7/292
While this change also has merit, it is also breaking change. There might
be code relying on %e containing embedded slashes, either directly in
core pattern:
%e.core
or via the pipe:
| /opt/corehandler '%e'
Isn't the interface change introduced by cn_escape() also a concern ?
Earl
--
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