On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 4:01 AM Matus Jokay <matus.jokay@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sorry guys for the mistake,
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> > index c75fd46506df..56a927393a38 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> > @@ -1083,7 +1083,7 @@ struct task_struct {
> > *
> > * - normally initialized setup_new_exec()
> > * - access it with [gs]et_task_comm()
> > - * - lock it with task_lock()
> > + * - lock it with task_lock() for writing
> there should be fixed only the comment about ->comm initialization during exec.
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index c75fd46506df..48aa5c85ed9e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1081,9 +1081,9 @@ struct task_struct {
> /*
> * executable name, excluding path.
> *
> - * - normally initialized setup_new_exec()
> + * - normally initialized begin_new_exec()
> * - access it with [gs]et_task_comm()
> - * - lock it with task_lock()
> + * - lock it with task_lock() for writing
> */
> char comm[TASK_COMM_LEN];
>
> Again, sorry for the noise. It's a very minor fix, but maybe even a small fix to the documentation can help increase the readability of the code.
>
Thank you for your improvement. It is very helpful. I will include it
in the next version.
--
Regards
Yafang
