Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-55440-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Feedback-ID: i21f147d5:Fastmail
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 11:09:34 -0700
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	Tycho Andersen <tandersen@netflix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pidfd: getfd should always report ESRCH if a task is
 exiting
Message-ID: <ZcJ13uLxD6rTqqZZ@tycho.pizza>
References: <20240206164308.62620-1-tycho@tycho.pizza>
 <20240206173722.GA3593@redhat.com>
 <20240206180607.GB3593@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240206180607.GB3593@redhat.com>

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 07:06:07PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Or we can check task->files != NULL rather than PF_EXITING.
> 
> To me this looks even better, but looks more confusing without a comment.
> OTOH, imo this needs a comment anyway ;)

I thought about this, but I didn't really understand the null check in
exit_files(); if it can really be called more than once, are there
other cases where task->files == NULL that we really should report
EBADF?

Tycho