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;
Date:   Fri, 4 Sep 2020 15:39:20 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To:     akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc:     oleg@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] tasklist_lock vs get/set priority syscalls
Message-ID: <20200904223920.5bwqyuiw266ypufi@linux-p48b>
References: <20200817003148.23691-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200817003148.23691-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 16 Aug 2020, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:

>Hi,
>
>This is a (late) update on trying to reduce some of the scope of the tasklist_lock
>for get/setpriority(2) as well as the block io equivalent. This version addresses
>Oleg's previous concerns and incorporates his feedback.
>
>Changes from v1:
>https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200512000353.23653-1-dave@stgolabs.net/
>
> - only take the lock for PGID cases.
> - drop bogus PF_EXITING checks (and live with the small exit race).
> - add patch for IOPRIO_WHO_PGRP.
>
>Please consider for v5.10.

Andrew, unless you have any objections, could you please pick these up?

Thanks,
Davidlohr