Re: [PATCH 02/12] oom: introduce find_lock_task_mm() to fix !mm false positives

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Could you see my previous comment?
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/6/2/325
> Anyway, I added my review sign
> 
> Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx>

Sorry, I had lost your comment ;)

But personally I don't like find_alive_subthread() because 
such function actually does,
  1) iterate threads in the same thread group
  2) find alive (a.k.a have ->mm) thread
  3) lock the task
and, I think (3) is most important role of this function.
So, I prefer to contain "lock" word.

Otherwise, people easily forget to cann task_unlock().
But I'm ok to rename any give me better name.

Thanks.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/