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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 D94BCC11F65 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 21:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C30196146D for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 21:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232523AbhF3Vrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:47:48 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38924 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232018AbhF3Vrq (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:47:46 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C90AC061756 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id i4so2261124plt.12 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:45:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=sL+FFKsX9IdN5XdQVajgEYwrzSq0hT/ELJaZM0Lrtzg=; b=C3soKyBYy0FjT9Fo/LQggyILS9Ty9DsEiwdgYoqhCWcL6wCHAOQXr6ZxRMTyW4ekD5 QJZnVWJKsbZxaZ9HVElMnmcdSJgxEkmwObesE9b7wMYGhq0DaaPeQY3+gwDUjFylKiGu pT313n7riRrBO5Hn/6ySxcYDjdTjqQ/+aPz4krMXjXN0cya00uuemKmmgc93ImWkxNwJ /bSeZDfgoWEVe2lfZ1CA6RDim0Uk++ZJzJ1njtt1GJYvu1uQkdLKTzMt3WmwdAgJ1x6E Q93t4d5gnE87Sc4Ah4haMzFVIadeSwP4FIAyZYSDoeUingmC8ZbbhXO6MvFPEV0xrko1 UywA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=sL+FFKsX9IdN5XdQVajgEYwrzSq0hT/ELJaZM0Lrtzg=; b=RgBn42Qccwjh49bUIx0+h+XD1UUwsN72NTgajxuVXxdwNSfDt2dp8uiTWBtAV+tTzq VNEOygNsPrCh4HGWxkmEUHiBlZMou+ENP1a4spA+OzifzgWK9ldtoXFgOGU6ZxWHlRZR G3spBUcyWb7g+ZomAcxjqQ+DtiD9bdR1dWnQ+fodbqmA8n/bjjpbYXQf09QfrCEF2lcd V3phfGw3zZJKpU2hhPMQM1PxfO8LI5kLYRP8XCJHx+lKl0zdtieBVjrJaA79cQDsxg/R 7D2CiRtb4hvqCYQeYsOvYc0AtLWdqbDh0HL67rPnMHStTZbCl6HrJl1ACmUGcXVoPbiF j1+g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HuSnWh0mtbT+2gwHatgrHat2ew2zdEQf4SEK+c/g52IixKxnv GXluccQhAwWpjBr6fGfAgch9rw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzjPM+JEpI3NZWKn5a3Rrz/XC40otouJCWOXpFaap6+sK1msyTi34OFYYVjwQrVVpFeWJJX2g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bb83:: with SMTP id v3mr9301754pjr.102.1625089515569; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:14ba]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ay3sm14271861pjb.38.2021.06.30.14.45.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:45:13 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Michal Hocko , David Rientjes , Matthew Wilcox , Roman Gushchin , Rik van Riel , Minchan Kim , Christian Brauner , Christoph Hellwig , Oleg Nesterov , David Hildenbrand , Jann Horn , Shakeel Butt , Tim Murray , Linux API , Linux-MM , LKML , Android Kernel Team Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: introduce process_reap system call Message-ID: References: <20210623192822.3072029-1-surenb@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:51:36AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:26 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Also, please consider removing all mention of the word "reap" from the > > user API. For better or for worse, "reap" in UNIX refers to what > > happens when a dead task gets wait()ed. I sincerely wish I could go > > back in time and gently encourage whomever invented that particular > > abomination to change their mind, but my time machine doesn't work. > > I see. Thanks for the note. How about process_mem_release() and > replacing reap with release everywhere? I don't quite understand the objection. This syscall works on tasks that are at the end of their life, right? Isn't something like process_mreap() establishing exactly the mental link we want here? Release is less descriptive for what this thing is to be used for.