On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:09 PM Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 06/25, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:51 AM Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > So far I don't understand this change. Quite possibly I missed something, > > > but in this case the changelog should explain the problem more clearly. > > > > > > > I just went off of "Called with mm->mmap_lock held for write." comment > > in uprobe_write_opcode(), tbh. > > Ah, indeed... and git blame makes me sad ;) > > I _think_ that 29dedee0e693a updated this comment without any thinking, > but today I can't recall. In any case, today this nothing to do with > mem_cgroup_charge(). Not sure __replace_page() is correct (in this respect) > when it returns -EAGAIN but this is another story. > > > If we don't actually need writer > > mmap_lock, we should probably update at least that comment. > > Agreed.
Ok, I'll drop this change and will just update the comment. > > > There is a > > lot going on in uprobe_write_opcode(), and I don't understand all the > > requirements there. > > Heh. Neither me today ;) > > Oleg. >
