[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YNzl6XNu2vxyCJu8@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:45:13 -0400
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: introduce process_reap system call
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:51:36AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:26 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Also, please consider removing all mention of the word "reap" from the
> > user API. For better or for worse, "reap" in UNIX refers to what
> > happens when a dead task gets wait()ed. I sincerely wish I could go
> > back in time and gently encourage whomever invented that particular
> > abomination to change their mind, but my time machine doesn't work.
>
> I see. Thanks for the note. How about process_mem_release() and
> replacing reap with release everywhere?
I don't quite understand the objection. This syscall works on tasks
that are at the end of their life, right? Isn't something like
process_mreap() establishing exactly the mental link we want here?
Release is less descriptive for what this thing is to be used for.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists