Hi!
> >>@@ -2925,7 +2925,7 @@ void submit_bio(int rw, struct bio *bio)
> >> if (unlikely(block_dump)) {
> >> char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE];
> >> printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s(%d): %s block %Lu on %s\n",
> >>- current->comm, current->pid,
> >>+ current->comm, task_pid(current),
> >> (rw & WRITE) ? "WRITE" : "READ",
> >> (unsigned long long)bio->bi_sector,
> >> bdevname(bio->bi_bdev,b));
> >
> >...and now printk is close to useless, because uer can't know to
> >which pidspace that pid belongs. Oops.
>
> Uhh, this patch doesn't introduce any kind of virtualization yet.
> When that happens, _this_ code will remain the same (it wants the
> real pid), but *other* code will switch to use task_vpid(current)
> instead. This is an extremely literal translation of current->pid to
> task_pid(current), both of which do exactly the same thing.
Hmm... it is hard to judge a patch without context. Anyway, can't we
get process snasphot/resume without virtualizing pids? Could we switch
to 128-bits so that pids are never reused or something like that?
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
