On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 02:02:32PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Perhaps. Or into task_tgid(). Or even the patch below, __task_pid_nr_ns()
> is always safe. This certainly needs some cleanups.
> --- x/include/linux/pid.h
> +++ x/include/linux/pid.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,8 @@ enum pid_type
> PIDTYPE_PID,
> PIDTYPE_PGID,
> PIDTYPE_SID,
> - PIDTYPE_MAX
> + PIDTYPE_MAX,
> + PIDTYPE_TGID /* do not use */
> };
>
> /*
> --- x/kernel/pid.c
> +++ x/kernel/pid.c
> @@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__task_pid_nr_ns);
>
> pid_t task_tgid_nr_ns(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pid_namespace *ns)
> {
> - return pid_nr_ns(task_tgid(tsk), ns);
> + return __task_pid_nr_ns(tsk, PIDTYPE_TGID, ns);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(task_tgid_nr_ns);
>
>
Right, that will return 0 on !alive. But I'm not seeing how PIDTYPE_TGID
isn't an array bound violating of its own though. Then again, I didn't
look to hard at the pid stuff.
