From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pidfd: verify task is alive when printing fdinfo Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 17:43:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20191015154327.GB16978@redhat.com> References: <20191015141332.4055-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> <20191015144356.GA16978@redhat.com> <20191015145646.72eqrw6j52ehvfn2@wittgenstein> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191015145646.72eqrw6j52ehvfn2@wittgenstein> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Brauner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Andrew Morton , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Ingo Molnar , Michal Hocko , Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , Christian Kellner , Roman Gushchin , Andrea Arcangeli , Al Viro , Aleksa Sarai , "Dmitry V. Levin" , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Jann Horn , linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 10/15, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 04:43:57PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > But in fact I'd suggest to simply use !hlist_empty(&pid->tasks[PIDTYPE_PID]) > > in pidfd_show_fdinfo() and do not add a new helper. > > Sounds good to me. But can't we then just do something similar just with > !hlist_empty(&pid->tasks[PIDTYPE_TGID]) > > in v5.4-rc3:kernel/pid.c:pidfd_open():514-517 ? Agreed. Actually, it seems to me I suggested to use rcu_lock_acquire() rather than rcu_read_lock() in pidfd_open() too. But hlist_empty(pid->tasks[type]) looks even better. If you decide to add a new helper, you can also change do_wait() which checks hlist_empty(&wo->wo_pid->tasks[wo->wo_type]). May be even __change_pid(). Oleg.