linux-2.6.17-rc3-git13

do_task_stat() was using too much stack
from make checkstack:
0x080eae08 do_task_stat: 1752

So I took almost all the variables used in the function and made a new structure do_task_stat_vars, and dynamically allocated it in the function. This is supposed to be a quick hack, and hopefully the authors will really do something about it.

Signed off by: Anne Thrax <[email protected]>

--- linux-2.6.17-rc3-git13/fs/proc/array.c 2006-05-07
23:01:50.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-uml/fs/proc/array.c 2006-05-08 01:31:12.000000000 -0400

(quoted diff) +1 -1

@@ -316,7 +316,7 @@
 
 static int do_task_stat(struct task_struct *task, char * buffer, int 
 whole)
 {
-       unsigned long vsize, eip, esp, wchan = ~0UL;
+       /* unsigned long vsize, eip, esp, wchan = ~0UL;
        long priority, nice;
        int tty_pgrp = -1, tty_nr = 0;

        sigset_t sigign, sigcatch;

(quoted diff) +0 -0

@@ -332,35 +332,49 @@
        unsigned long rsslim = 0;
        struct task_struct *t;
        char tcomm[sizeof(task->comm)];

Quoted 11 lines · Matthew Wilcox

Quoted 10 lines · Greg KH

Quoted 9 lines · Nishanth Aravamudan

Quoted 1 line · Anne Thrax

I would rather not use my real name, as I am only 14 years old.

I'm not sure I entirely understand how the one stems from the other, but I think the spirit of the "personal information" part of the DCO (Developer's Certificate of Origin, in Documentation/SubmittingPatches) is something like full disclosure. Also, I wonder how, if at all, the DCO can be enforced when it involves a minor. I'll defer to Greg on this one... at least on whatever precedent exists, I don't expect a legal decision, Greg :)

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Doesn't matter, we still need a real name. It's not a legal issue but a "trace the blame" issue.

A pseudonym + email address performs acceptably for "trace the blame". So I don't see how your two statements are related.

It's a matter of trust. If you want to trust us to take your changes, you need to show that you trust us enough to be willing to accept recgonition for those changes. By using a pseudonym, you are not showing a whole lot of trust, and by using it, it take a whole lot more effort to get that trust.

That being said, there are a few pseudonyms out there that I do trust, just because they have been around for years and show that they are trustworthy people.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

hi,
i read that some parents in the US force there children not to reveal the identify online. This is a problem for the kids.
To help i think they should tell there read identify a trustee and get a bogus name what appears in the logs. forcing them to reveal will cause only trouble.

Quoted 6 lines · walter harms

hi,
i read that some parents in the US force there children not to reveal the identify online. This is a problem for the kids.
To help i think they should tell there read identify a trustee and get a bogus name what appears in the logs. forcing them to reveal will cause only trouble.

We have had people under 18 submit code all the time in the past. If a parent doesn't want their child submitting code in their own name to the Linux kernel, I would really wonder about that parent...