Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] proc: Ensure we see the exit of each process tid exactly

[Eric W. Biederman]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:20 AM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> In short I don't think this change will introduce any regressions.
>
> I think the series looks fine, but I also think the long explanation
> (that I snipped in this reply) in the cover letter should be there in
> the kernel tree.

When I have been adding patchsets like this to my tree I have been doing
merge --no-ff so I can create a place for explanations like this, and I
will do the same with this.

I already have Alexey Gladkov's proc changes, and my next_tgid cleanup
on a branch of proc changes in my tree already.

> So if you send me this as a single pull request, with that explanation
> (either in the email or in the signed tag - although you don't seem to
> use tags normally - so that we have that extra commentary for
> posterity, that sounds good.

I hope you don't mind if I combind this with some other proc changes.
If you do mind I will put this on a separate topic branch.

Right now it just seems easier for me to keep track of if I keep my
number of topics limited.

> That said, this fix seems to not matter for normal operation, so
> unless it's holding up something important, maybe it's 5.8 material?

Yes, this is 5.8 material.

I am just aiming to get review before I put in linux-next, and later
send it to your for merging.  I should have mentioned that in the cover
letter.

I am noticing that removing technical debt without adding more technical
debt is quite a challenge.

Eric