[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081004205522.GA4259@x200.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 00:55:22 +0400
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal, procfs: lock_task_sighand() do not need
rcu_read_lock()
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 08:29:15PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >
> > lock_task_sighand() make sure task->sighand is being protected,
> > so we do not need rcu_read_lock().
> > [ exec() will get task->sighand->siglock before change task->sighand! ]
> >
> > But code using rcu_read_lock() _just_ to protect lock_task_sighand()
> > only appear in procfs. (and some code in procfs use lock_task_sighand()
> > without such redundant protection.)
>
> Yes, the patch looks correct.
Yeah, applied to proc.git
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists