Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86/mm/hotplug: Remove pgd_list use from the memory hotplug code

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 09/22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> However, this now becomes a pattern for the series, and that just makes me think
>
>     "Why is this not a 'for_each_mm()' pattern helper?"

And we already have other users. And note that oom_kill_process() does _not_
follow this pattern and that is why it is buggy.

So this is funny, but I was thinking about almost the same, something like

	struct task_struct *next_task_with_mm(struct task_struct *p)
	{
		struct task_struct *t;

		p = p->group_leader;
		while ((p = next_task(p)) != &init_task) {
			if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)
				continue;

			t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
			if (t)
				return t;
		}

		return NULL;
	}

	#define for_each_task_lock_mm(p)
		for (p = &init_task; (p = next_task_with_mm(p)); task_unlock(p))


So that you can do

	for_each_task_lock_mm(p) {
		do_something_with(p->mm);

		if (some_condition()) {
			// UNFORTUNATELY you can't just do "break"
			task_unlock(p);
			break;
		}
	}

do you think it makes sense?


In fact it can't be simpler, we can move task_unlock() into next_task_with_mm(),
it can check ->mm != NULL or p != init_task.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>