[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131007124319.GA24450@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 14:43:19 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/pid.c: check pid whether be NULL in
__change_pid()
On 10/07, Chen Gang wrote:
>
> Within __change_pid(), 'new' may be NULL if it comes from detach_pid(),
> and 'link->pid' also may be NULL ("link->pid = new"), so theoretically,\
> the original 'link->pid' may be NULL, too.
I don't really understand this "theoretically",
> In real world, at least now, all callers which will call detach_pid()
> or change_pid() will not cause issue,
Yes,
> but still recommend to check it
> in __change_pid() to let itself consistency.
Why?
Contrary, I think we should not hide the problem. If __change_pid() is
called when task->pids[type].pid is already NULL there is something
seriously wrong.
Oleg.
--
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