[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131120183024.GA12212@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 19:30:24 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Sameer Nanda <snanda@...omium.org>,
Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] proc: change first_tid() to use while_each_thread()
rather than next_thread()
Rerwrite the main loop to use while_each_thread() instead of
next_thread(). We are going to fix or replace while_each_thread(),
next_thread() should be avoided whenever possible.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
---
fs/proc/base.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
index da12c5c..7ab3785 100644
--- a/fs/proc/base.c
+++ b/fs/proc/base.c
@@ -3100,23 +3100,23 @@ static struct task_struct *first_tid(struct task_struct *leader,
}
/* If nr exceeds the number of threads there is nothing todo */
- pos = NULL;
if (nr && nr >= get_nr_threads(leader))
- goto out;
+ goto fail;
/* It could be unhashed before we take rcu lock */
if (!pid_alive(leader))
- goto out;
+ goto fail;
/* If we haven't found our starting place yet start
* with the leader and walk nr threads forward.
*/
- for (pos = leader; nr > 0; --nr) {
- pos = next_thread(pos);
- if (pos == leader) {
- pos = NULL;
- goto out;
- }
- }
+ pos = leader;
+ do {
+ if (nr-- <= 0)
+ goto found;
+ } while_each_thread(leader, pos);
+fail:
+ pos = NULL;
+ goto out;
found:
get_task_struct(pos);
out:
--
1.5.5.1
--
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