> diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
> index 5e62d26..34fa611 100644
> --- a/fs/exec.c
> +++ b/fs/exec.c
> @@ -998,17 +998,28 @@ static void flush_old_files(struct files_struct * files)
>
> char *get_task_comm(char *buf, struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> - /* buf must be at least sizeof(tsk->comm) in size */
> - task_lock(tsk);
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&tsk->comm_lock, flags);
> strncpy(buf, tsk->comm, sizeof(tsk->comm));
> - task_unlock(tsk);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tsk->comm_lock, flags);
> return buf;
> }
>
> void set_task_comm(struct task_struct *tsk, char *buf)
> {
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + /*
> + * XXX - Even though comm is protected by comm_lock,
> + * we take the task_lock here to serialize against
> + * current users that directly access comm.
> + * Once those users are removed, we can drop the
> + * task locking& memsetting.
> + */
If we provide __get_task_comm(), we can't remove memset() forever.
> task_lock(tsk);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&tsk->comm_lock, flags);
This is strange order. task_lock() doesn't disable interrupt.
And, can you please document why we need interrupt disabling?
> /*
> * Threads may access current->comm without holding
> * the task lock, so write the string carefully.
--
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>