[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87my9jj0ko.wl%vmayatsk@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 May 2009 14:17:27 +0200
From:	Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Split wait_noreap_copyout()
At Mon, 11 May 2009 08:04:18 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> wouldn't this better be written as:
> 
> static int wait_copyout(struct wait_opts *wo, struct task_struct *p,
> 			pid_t pid, uid_t uid, int why, int status, int signal)
> {
> 	struct siginfo __user *infop = wo->wo_info;
> 
> 	if (wo->wo_rusage) {
> 		int retval = getrusage(p, RUSAGE_BOTH, wo->wo_rusage);
> 		if (retval)
> 			return retval;
> 	}
> 
> 	if (!infop)
> 		return 0;
> 
> 	if (put_user(signal, &infop->si_signo) ||
> 	    put_user(0, &infop->si_errno) ||
> 	    put_user((short)why, &infop->si_code) ||
> 	    put_user(pid, &infop->si_pid) ||
> 	    put_user(uid, &infop->si_uid) ||
> 	    put_user(status, &infop->si_status))
> 		return -EFAULT;
> 	return 0;
> }
Yes. But I'm planning to get rid of put_user() in next patches.
-- 
wbr, Vitaly
--
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