Skip to contentSkip to conversation

export kernel call get_task_comm().

PATCH In review [email protected] 2 participants 3 messages Apr 22, 2011

Subsystems (2)
VFS exec and binfmt
lore
Share & tools
lore

[email protected]

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 export kernel call get_task_comm().

From: J Freyensee <[email protected]>

This allows drivers who call this function to be compiled modularly. Otherwise, a driver who is interested in this type of functionality has to implement their own get_task_comm() call, causing code duplication in the Linux source tree.

Signed-off-by J Freyensee <[email protected]>
---
 fs/exec.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/exec.c +1 -0
index 8328beb..e1ac338 100644
@@ -1004,6 +1004,7 @@ char *get_task_comm(char *buf, struct task_struct *tsk)
 	task_unlock(tsk);
 	return buf;
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_task_comm);
 
 void set_task_comm(struct task_struct *tsk, char *buf)
 {
Signature · 1 line
1.7.2.3
Acked-by on v1 1/1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, [email protected] wrote:

From: J Freyensee <[email protected]>

This allows drivers who call this function to be compiled modularly. Otherwise, a driver who is interested in this type of functionality has to implement their own get_task_comm() call, causing code duplication in the Linux source tree.

Signed-off-by J Freyensee <[email protected]>
Acked-by David Rientjes <[email protected]>

I still suggest that we implement finer-grained protection for tsk->comm through get_task_comm(), though, because it's going to be difficult to know whether task_lock(tsk) is held in all contexts we'll want to call it; task_lock(tsk) is used to protect many members of task_struct.

author
#2 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · David Rientjes
Quoted 7 lines · On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, [email protected] wrote:

From: J Freyensee <[email protected]>

This allows drivers who call this function to be compiled modularly. Otherwise, a driver who is interested in this type of functionality has to implement their own get_task_comm() call, causing code duplication in the Linux source tree.

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by J Freyensee <[email protected]>
Acked-by David Rientjes <[email protected]>

I still suggest that we implement finer-grained protection for tsk->comm through get_task_comm(), though, because it's going to be difficult to know whether task_lock(tsk) is held in all contexts we'll want to call it; task_lock(tsk) is used to protect many members of task_struct.

Okay, but how about accepting this as step 1, then investigate a finer grained lock structure as step 2?