Re: +c-r-prctl-add-ability-to-set-new-mm_struct-exe_file-update-after-mm-num_exe_file_vmas-removal.patch added to -mm tree

From: Cyrill Gorcunov
Date: Thu Apr 19 2012 - 18:32:56 EST

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 12:09:19AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > I guess maybe it's time to drop one-shot requirement and as result
> > we can drop MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED bit completely,
> Plus perhaps we can remove this for_each_vma check?
> > making overall code simplier?
> Personally I'd certainly prefer this ;)
> But let me repeat to avoid the confusion. I am fine either way,
> I am not going to discuss this again unless I see something which
> looks technically wrong. And the current MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED
> doesn't look right even if the problem is minor.

So if there no stong agrues against, lets rip all together --
and for_each_vma and MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED bits, finally making
code simplier.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at