[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120214174528.GA23562@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:45:28 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] signal: give SEND_SIG_FORCED more power to beat
SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE
Hi Tejun,
On 02/10, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > --- a/kernel/signal.c
> > +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> > @@ -1059,7 +1059,8 @@ static int __send_signal(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t,
> >
> > assert_spin_locked(&t->sighand->siglock);
> >
> > - if (!prepare_signal(sig, t, from_ancestor_ns))
> > + if (!prepare_signal(sig, t,
> > + from_ancestor_ns || (info == SEND_SIG_FORCED)))
>
> How about the following indentation instead? :)
>
> if (!prepare_signal(sig, t,
> from_ancestor_ns || (info == SEND_SIG_FORCED)))
Well, I am not sure this looks better, although I do not really mind.
But since this patch is already in -mm, I think I won't send v2 ;)
> Please feel free to add Reviewed-by for 2-4.
Thanks!
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists