From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757738Ab3FLB3B (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:29:01 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:44464 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757645Ab3FLB3A (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:29:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 18:28:31 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Cc: "Raphael S. Carvalho" , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Serge Hallyn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kernel/pid.c: Masking the flag out to get the actual value. Message-Id: <20130611182831.8d6d25be.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <8761xkt9fh.fsf@xmission.com> References: <1370901398-8989-1-git-send-email-raphael.scarv@gmail.com> <20130611154518.fda9262961c21e96a57cbd5e@linux-foundation.org> <8761xkt9fh.fsf@xmission.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 18:16:50 -0700 ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > > > Hopefully we can fix this one by adding the missing comment. > > Perhaps we can fix this one by having people who care read the code and > think about what it means? As is obvious from this thread, that approach isn't working. > Seriously if we are adding pids/processes in > the pid namespace why would to clean up the pid namespace? A good way to communicate the design would be to describe the semantics of PIDNS_HASH_ADDING, at its definition site. [idly wonders what the heck pid_namespace.level and pid.level do, sigh]