Re: task_numa_fault() && TASK_DEAD
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Thu Sep 04 2014 - 06:42:46 EST
On 09/04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 06:08:19PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > And a stupid (really, I don't understand this code) question:
> > /* for example, ksmd faulting in a user's mm */
> > if (!p->mm)
> > return;
> In general kernel threads have !->mm, and those cannot do the
> accounting. The only way to get here is through get_user_pages() with
> tsk != current and/or mm != current->mm.
> > OK, but perhaps it make sense to pass "mm" as another argument and do
> > /* ksmd faulting in a user's mm, or debugger, or kthread use_mm() caller */
> > if (p->mm != mm)
> > return;
> > ?
> I'm still somewhat fuzzy in the brain but that doesn't appear to
> actually work, use_mm() explicitly sets ->mm so in that case it would
> match just fine.
Yes, yes, sorry, I meant
if (p->mm != mm || PF_KTHREAD)
> That said; I don't think we really need to worry about this. The !->mm
> case is special in that that cannot ever work, the other cases are
> extremely rare and will not skew accounting much if anything.
Sure, this is not bugfix. To me this change looks like a cleanup because
I think that, say, ksmd doesn't really differ from debugger in this case
(ignoring the fact that ->mm == NULL can probably lead to crash), or from
But of course I agree, this is minor.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/