[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230828105453.GB19186@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:54:54 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kui-Feng Lee <kuifeng@...com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] bpf: task_group_seq_get_next: fix the
skip_if_dup_files check
On 08/27, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> On 8/27/23 1:19 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> >But. if the group leader M exits then M->files == NULL. And in this case
> >task_seq_get_next() will need to "inspect" all the sub-threads even if they all
> >have the same ->files pointer.
>
> That is correct. I do not have practical experience on how much
> possibility this scenario may happen. I assume it should be very low.
Yes. I just tried to explain why the ->files check looks confusing to me.
Nevermind.
Could you review 6/6 as well?
Should I fold 1-5 into a single patch? I tried to document every change
and simplify the review, but I do not want to blow the git history.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists