Re: [RFC PATCH 5/X] ptrace: mv task_struct->ptrace ptrace_task->pt_flags, kill ptrace_link()

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 05/25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> >  struct ptrace_task {
> > +	unsigned long	pt_flags;
> >  };
>
> > -	return task->ptrace;
> > +	return unlikely(task->ptrace_task) ?
> > +		task->ptrace_task->pt_flags : 0;
>
> Please no pt_ prefixes. It is abundantly clear from the
> '->ptrace_ctx' portion already that it's about ptrace - the rest
> should be a straightforward minimalistic naming - i.e.
> ->ptrace_ctx->flags.

OK, will rename.

But note that you can't use cscope to find the usage of ->flags. Even
grep is not reliable, unless the code always adds 'ptrace' to the name
of the pointer.

> Also, is the conditional necessary? We should not be calling ptrace
> methods on tasks with no ptrace context.

It is mostly used as is_task_ptraced() actually, that is why ptrace context
can be NULL.

This in turn needs cleanups, will be addressed further.

Oleg.