On Tue 2021-11-02 09:26:35, Yafang Shao wrote:

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:18 AM Steven Rostedt [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:09:50 +0800
Yafang Shao [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

     Now we only care about kthread, so we can put the pointer into a
kthread specific struct.
     For example in the struct kthread, or in kthread->data (which may
conflict with workqueue).

No, add a new field to the structure. "full_name" or something like that.
I'm guessing it should be NULL if the name fits in TASK_COMM_LEN and
allocated if the name had to be truncated.

Do not overload data with this. That will just make things confusing.
There's not that many kthreads, where an addition of an 8 byte pointer is
going to cause issues.

Sure, I will add a new field named "full_name", which only be
allocated if the kthread's comm is truncated.

The plan looks good to me.

One more thing. It should obsolete the workqueue-specific solution.
It would be great to clean up the workqueue code as the next step.

Best Regards,
Petr