[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180317164407.GB1619@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:44:07 +0100
From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/36] kernel: use kernel_wait4() instead of
sys_wait4()
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:04:55PM +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> > index 18e5fa4b0e71..f4b557cadf08 100644
> > --- a/kernel/umh.c
> > +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> > @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> > *
> > * Thus the __user pointer cast is valid here.
> > */
> > - sys_wait4(pid, (int __user *)&ret, 0, NULL);
> > + kernel_wait4(pid, (int __user *)&ret, 0, NULL);
> >
> > /*
> > * If ret is 0, either call_usermodehelper_exec_async failed and
>
> There is also a reference to sys_wait4() usage on umh.c:
>
> /* If SIGCLD is ignored sys_wait4 won't populate the status. */
> kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_DFL);
>
> Does that remain true for kernel_wait4()? If so that comment should be updated
> as well.
Thanks, have updated the comment.
Dominik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists