Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] don't use pid for request cancellation
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>, io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     ebiederm@xmission.com
References: <cover.1592206077.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <9b90fd1d-c60d-523a-b6b5-6c960ae52cc6@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:04:56 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <cover.1592206077.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 6/15/20 1:33 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Cancel requests of an extiting task based on ->task address. As
> reported by Eric W. Biederman, using pid for this purpose is not
> right.
> 
> note: rebased on top of "cancel all" patches

Looks good, and I had the same thought of not grabbing a ref to the
task for the cancel case where we don't need to dereference it.

-- 
Jens Axboe