Re: [PATCH RESEND] kernel/fork: Update obsolete use_mm references to kthread_use_mm

["David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>]

On 1/6/26 12:53, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 10:29:03AM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:
>> On 1/6/26 10:26, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Tue 06-01-26 07:05:28, mingzhu.wang(王明珠) wrote:
>>>> The comment for get_task_mm() in kernel/fork.c incorrectly references the deprecated function `use_mm()`, which has been renamed to `kthread_use_mm()` in kernel/kthread.c.
>>>> This patch updates the documentation to reflect the current function names, ensuring accuracy when developers refer to the kernel thread memory context API.
>>>> No functional changes were introduced.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: mingzhu.wang <mingzhu.wang@transsion.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c index c4ada32598bd..64e228c541bc 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/fork.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
>>>> @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ struct file *get_task_exe_file(struct task_struct *task)
>>>>     * @task: The task.
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Returns %NULL if the task has no mm.  Checks PF_KTHREAD (meaning
>>>> - * this kernel workthread has transiently adopted a user mm with use_mm,
>>>> + * this kernel workthread has transiently adopted a user mm with
>>>> + kthread_use_mm,
>>>
>>> Please do not wrap the line here.
>>
>> But please do so in the patch description, where the maximum should usually
>> be 72 characters per line. :)
> 
> 75 ;-P

You are technically correct sir.

I think it dates back to "git show"/"git log" adding 4 spaces in front, 
making the text still fit into 80c terminals. So you want <= 76. Then, 
whether a project allows for going up to 76, 75 or 72 depends on the 
religious believes.

https://tbaggery.com/2008/04/19/a-note-about-git-commit-messages.html

Is an interesting read.

I've been trying to stick to the 50/72 rule for years, especially as 
it's easy to remember across projects. Well, I frequently violate the 
"50" part :)

-- 
Cheers

David