[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251125000407.24470-1-s9430939@naver.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 09:04:07 +0900
From: Minu Jin <s9430939@...er.com>
To: mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
david@...nel.org,
kees@...nel.org
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de,
vschneid@...hat.com,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
vbabka@...e.cz,
rppt@...nel.org,
surenb@...gle.com,
mhocko@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
Minu Jin <s9430939@...er.com>
Subject: [PATCH] fork-comment-fix: remove ambiguous question mark in CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID comment
The current comment "Clear TID on mm_release()?" ends with a question mark,
implying uncertainty about whether the TID is actually cleared in mm_release().
However, the code flow is deterministic.
When a task exits, mm_release() explicitly checks 'tsk->clear_child_tid' and clears.
Since this behavior is unambiguous,
remove the confusing question mark and rephrase the comment to clearly state that TID is cleared in mm_release().
Signed-off-by: Minu Jin <s9430939@...er.com>
---
kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index 3da0f08615a9..ed46e12c8060 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -2031,7 +2031,7 @@ __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
p->set_child_tid = (clone_flags & CLONE_CHILD_SETTID) ? args->child_tid : NULL;
/*
- * Clear TID on mm_release()?
+ * TID is cleared in mm_release() when the task exits
*/
p->clear_child_tid = (clone_flags & CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID) ? args->child_tid : NULL;
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists