From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756607Ab2DSVcN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:32:13 -0400
Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174]:59819 "EHLO
	mail-lb0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756561Ab2DSVcJ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:32:09 -0400
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:32:04 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, khlebnikov@openvz.org, keescook@chromium.org,
        kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, tj@kernel.org,
        xemul@parallels.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: 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
Message-ID: <20120419213204.GP1893@moon>
References: <20120419185221.E8ED6A055E@akpm.mtv.corp.google.com>
 <20120419192005.GA13558@redhat.com>
 <20120419210033.GO1893@moon>
 <20120419211216.GA2200@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120419211216.GA2200@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:12:16PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Heh :) Oleg, it was actually your idea to make this feature "one-shot".
> 
> Heh, no ;)
> 
> IIRC, I only asked you what do you actually want,
> 
> 	Just one note for the record, prctl_set_mm_exe_file() does
> 
> 		if (mm->num_exe_file_vmas)
> 			return -EBUSY;
> 
> 	We could do
> 
> 		if (mm->exe_file)
> 			return -EBUSY;
> 
> 	This way "because this feature is a special to C/R" becomes
> 	really true. IOW, you can't do PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE twice.
> 
> 	I am fine either way, just I want to ensure you really want
> 	the current version.
> 
> and only because it was documented as "feature is a special to C/R".

ok, ubedil :)

> > Once exe-file changed to a new value, it can't be changed again. The
> > reason was to bring at least minimum disturbance in sysadmins life.
> 
> You misunderstood. I am not arguing with "one-shot", I do not really
> care.
> 
> My question is: unless I missed something "it can't be changed again"
> is not actually true. A task does PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE, then it forks
> the new child. The child can do PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE again. Is this
> by design?

Hmm, not sure, Konstantin?

	Cyrill