[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220506150903.GB16084@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 17:09:04 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, mingo@...nel.org,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, tj@...nel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/12] ptrace: Don't change __state
On 05/05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ struct task_group;
> /* Convenience macros for the sake of set_current_state: */
> #define TASK_KILLABLE (TASK_WAKEKILL | TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
> #define TASK_STOPPED (TASK_WAKEKILL | __TASK_STOPPED)
> -#define TASK_TRACED (TASK_WAKEKILL | __TASK_TRACED)
> +#define TASK_TRACED __TASK_TRACED
however I personally still dislike this change. But let me read the
code with this series applied, perhaps I will change my mind. If not,
I will argue ;)
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists