[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160913145906.GA28037@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:59:07 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@...ux.intel.com>,
pbonzini@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, gleb@...nel.org, mtosatti@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stefanha@...hat.com, yuhuang@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm, proc: Fix region lost in /proc/self/smaps
On 09/12, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> Considering how this all can be tricky and how partial reads can be
> confusing and even misleading I am really wondering whether we
> should simply document that only full reads will provide a sensible
> results.
I agree. I don't even understand why this was considered as a bug.
Obviously, m_stop() which drops mmap_sep should not be called, or
all the threads should be stopped, if you want to trust the result.
Although all I can recall about this code is that it needs more cleanups.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists