On 08/01, Zach Levis wrote: > > So an example of what this would be used for (going into commit message > of a v2 with your earlier suggestions):
Ah, so you are going to send v2, great. May I ask you to wait a little bit? Once again, I believe that search_binary_handler() needs a cleanup + minor fix. I'll try to send the patch today. > With this patch, an error is printed I agree, it makes sense to print an error with names. > and search_binary_handler() > continues on to the next handler, allowing the original executable to > run normally so the user can (hopefully) fix their misconfiguration more > easily. Still not sure this makes sense, but I can't judge and I won't argue. >>> And I do not think we should ignore the possible error from >>> copy_strings(). Even if we know that it succeeded before, another >>> thread can, say, unmap this memory in between. >> >> And since we do copy_strings() again we probably need acct_arg_size() >> after remove_arg_zero() loop, although this is not that important. > I'm not sure if that's even necessary. Yes, I was wrong, thanks for correcting me. We don't need this. > It looks like there's > copy_strings()->get_arg_page()->acct_arg_size() that's already called. This doesn't matter, this won't unaccount the memory. But I was wrong anyway, we do not need to unaccount because vma won't grow. Oleg. -- 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/
