Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:56:36 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm, proc: Fix region lost in /proc/self/smaps |
| |
On 09/23, Robert Ho wrote: > > --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c > +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c > @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ m_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv, struct vm_area_struct *vma) > static void m_cache_vma(struct seq_file *m, struct vm_area_struct *vma) > { > if (m->count < m->size) /* vma is copied successfully */ > - m->version = m_next_vma(m->private, vma) ? vma->vm_start : -1UL; > + m->version = m_next_vma(m->private, vma) ? vma->vm_end : -1UL; > }
OK.
> static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos) > @@ -176,14 +176,14 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos) > > if (last_addr) { > vma = find_vma(mm, last_addr); > - if (vma && (vma = m_next_vma(priv, vma))) > + if (vma) > return vma; > }
I think we can simplify this patch. And imo make it better. How about
if (last_addr) { vma = find_vma(mm, last_addr - 1); if (vma && vma->vm_start <= last_addr) vma = m_next_vma(priv, vma); if (vma) return vma; }
?
This way we do not need other changes in show_map_vma(), and the same vma won't be reported twice (as 2 different vma's) if it grows in between.
Oleg.
| |