From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FB3C32789 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 16:57:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC0C220831 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 16:57:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EC0C220831 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730307AbeKUD1m (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 22:27:42 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:33300 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725925AbeKUD1m (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 22:27:42 -0500 Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 512) id B974C80854; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:57:30 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:57:33 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Vlastimil Babka , Daniel Colascione , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rppt@linux.ibm.com, timmurray@google.com, joelaf@google.com, surenb@google.com, Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Mike Rapoport , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , "Dennis Zhou (Facebook)" , Prashant Dhamdhere , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Document /proc/pid PID reuse behavior Message-ID: <20181120165732.GA13147@amd> References: <20181031150625.147369-1-dancol@google.com> <20181105132205.138695-1-dancol@google.com> <20181119105426.GD28607@amd> <1c5caa66-3c61-cb57-754a-f099200c73b2@suse.cz> <20181120094950.11978b68@lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KsGdsel6WgEHnImy" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181120094950.11978b68@lwn.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue 2018-11-20 09:49:50, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:05:21 +0100 > Vlastimil Babka wrote: >=20 > > Why can't the documentation describe the current implementation, and > > change in the future if the implementation changes? I doubt somebody > > would ever rely on the pid being reused while having the descriptor > > open. How would that make sense? >=20 > In the hopes of ending this discussion, I'm going to go ahead and apply > this. Documenting current behavior is good, especially in situations > where that behavior can surprise people; if the implementation changes, > the docs can change with it. I'd still prefer changing from "does not" to "may not". It is really simple change, and once we documented a behaviour, we really should not be changing it. Thanks, Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlv0PPwACgkQMOfwapXb+vIm1wCgtqq+S/IMFCHeWfVA9EAAo+l5 f4IAni29EPb2X3/9RSgyLOSK4XjdQmfa =K4i7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy--