[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120309154224.GE13346@moon>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 19:42:24 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] c/r: prctl: Add ability to set new mm_struct::exe_file v3
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 04:21:22PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> But, when you send the patch to Andrew, please remind that he
> should remove the evidence of my ignorance from -mm first.
>
Ah, will ping him, sure. I'll send two patches in series
one -- this patch and second
"From: Andrew Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>"
"Subject: c/r: prctl: Add ability to get clear_tid_address"
for which I've got no feedback at all :( Is there some
fundamental problem with this patch? Or everyone simply
agree on it? ;) Anyway, I hope with next series I'll get
some feedback fron anyone in CC list :)
>
> Just one note for the record, prctl_set_mm_exe_file() does
>
> if (mm->num_exe_file_vmas)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> We could do
>
> if (mm->exe_file)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> This way "because this feature is a special to C/R" becomes
> really true. IOW, you can't do PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE twice.
>
Sure, i'll make it this way. Thanks a lot, Oleg!!!
> I am fine either way, just I want to ensure you really want
> the current version.
>
Cyrill
--
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