linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] recalc_sigpending

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 17 May 2007 03:43:20 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steve.Hawkes@...orola.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] recalc_sigpending_tsk fixes

On 05/16, Roland McGrath wrote:
> 
> + * After recalculating TIF_SIGPENDING, we need to make sure the task wakes up.
> + * This is superfluous when called on current, the wakeup is a harmless no-op.
> + */
> +void recalc_sigpending_and_wake(struct task_struct *t)
> +{
> +	if (recalc_sigpending_tsk(t))
> +		signal_wake_up(t, 0);
>  }

We already discussed this, this is not so important, but how about

	void recalc_sigpending_and_wake(struct task_struct *t)
	{
		int was_pending = signal_pending(t);

		if (recalc_sigpending_tsk(t) && !was_pending)
			signal_wake_up(t, 0);
	}

?

This "was_pending" is more a documenation than a optimization.

Oleg.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/