> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > The rule is, > > > > 1) writing comm > > need task_lock > > 2) read _another_ thread's comm > > need task_lock > > 3) read own comm > > no need task_lock > > > > That was true a while ago, but you now need to protect every thread's > ->comm with get_task_comm() or ensuring task_lock() is held to protect > against /proc/pid/comm which can change other thread's ->comm. That was > different before when prctl(PR_SET_NAME) would only operate on current, so > no lock was needed when reading current->comm. Right. /proc/pid/comm is evil. We have to fix it. otherwise we need change all of current->comm user. It's very lots! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>