Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752788Ab3H0RR7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:17:59 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40743 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752409Ab3H0RR6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:17:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 19:11:34 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Paris , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] pid: rewrite task helper functions avoiding task->pid and task->tgid Message-ID: <20130827171134.GB29147@redhat.com> References: <20130822200555.GN31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130822214347.GB21110@madcap2.tricolour.ca> <20130823192807.GA6504@redhat.com> <20130827030448.GE21110@madcap2.tricolour.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130827030448.GE21110@madcap2.tricolour.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1979 Lines: 60 On 08/26, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 09:28:07PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > Or 3/12. > > That is a cleanup to make clear what parts are actually pid-related and > what isn't. You know, I decided to send another email about this patch. This cleanup doesn't look even correct. > > OK, I agree sys_getppid() in audit_log_task_info() looks > > strange at least. Just fix it using the helpers we already have and > > add the new helpers later. Or send the patch(es) which adds the new > > helpers first. > > Patch 04/12 is that helper. It is used in only two places in audit I see what 3/4 do. But I am not sure we need this. At least in this series. OK, why do we need 3 new helper? audit needs only one, task_ppid_nr_init_ns(). And who else needs this task_ppid* stuff? > once in apparmor), OK, apparmor. So perhaps a single new helper in sched.c makes sense, I dunno. But see above. > > Or task_pid_nr_init_ns()... For what? We already have task_pid_nr(). > > Use the helper we already have, or introduce the new one first and > > change the current users of task_pid_nr(). > > If task_struct::pid is definitely not going away, then that whole part > is moot and we'll just use task_pid_nr() as is. Can't understand. We already have task_tgid_nr(). This helper can be changed to avoid ->tgig. Why task_ppid_nr_init_ns() can't use the helper we already have? But let me repeat. I am not maintainer and I do not really care. You should convince Eric, I am not going to argue. Btw. audit looks unmaintained... if you are going to take care of this code, perhaps you can look at http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137589907108485 http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137590271809664 ? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/