[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5562E30E.80308@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 10:53:34 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>, oleg@...hat.com,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
vdavydov@...allels.com
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] signal:remove duplicate code
Am 25.05.2015 um 07:49 schrieb yalin wang:
> __dequeue_signal() is only called by dequeue_signal(), after that,
> dequeue_signal() will call recalc_sigpending(), this function will
> set or unset TIF_SIGPENDING bit, so we don't need do this in
> __dequeue_signal()
>
> Signed-off-by: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>
> ---
> kernel/signal.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index 836df8d..de33281 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -583,10 +583,9 @@ static int __dequeue_signal(struct sigpending *pending, sigset_t *mask,
> if (sig) {
> if (current->notifier) {
> if (sigismember(current->notifier_mask, sig)) {
> - if (!(current->notifier)(current->notifier_data)) {
> - clear_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING);
Here be dragons.
In __dequeue_signal() we clear TIF_SIGPENDING depending
on the result of ->notifier().
Did you double check that clearing that flag goes hand in hand
with recalc_sigpending()?
Thanks,
//richard
--
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