On 02/29, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:11:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > @@ -1178,6 +1178,7 @@ static struct xol_area *__create_xol_area(unsigned
> > long vaddr)
> > goto free_area;
> >
> > area->xol_mapping.name = "[uprobes]";
> > + area->xol_mapping.fault = NULL;
> > area->xol_mapping.pages = area->pages;
>
> Would not something like:
>
> area->xol_mapping = (struct vm_special_mapping){
> .name = "[uprobes]",
> .pages = area->pages,
> };
>
> Be a more robust approach? That way, if someone adds more fields, they
> at least get initialized (to 0).
OK, agreed...
Do you want me to send v2? Or incremental patch because this one is already in
-tip tree.
Or do nothing unless you feel strongly about it. area->xol_mapping should go
away,
but we need a simple preparation in mm/mmap.c.
Oleg.
