[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180528215355.16119-6-christian@brauner.io>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 23:53:40 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: ebiederm@...ssion.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
mingo@...nel.org, james.morris@...rosoft.com,
keescook@...omium.org, peterz@...radead.org, sds@...ho.nsa.gov,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
oleg@...hat.com, Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Subject: [PATCH v1 05/20] signal: flatten do_send_sig_info()
Let's return early when lock_task_sighand() fails and move send_signal()
and unlock_task_sighand() out of the if block.
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
---
v0->v1:
* patch unchanged
---
kernel/signal.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index baae137455eb..a628b56415e6 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -1167,16 +1167,16 @@ specific_send_sig_info(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
}
int do_send_sig_info(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *p,
- bool group)
+ bool group)
{
unsigned long flags;
int ret = -ESRCH;
- if (lock_task_sighand(p, &flags)) {
- ret = send_signal(sig, info, p, group);
- unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
- }
+ if (!lock_task_sighand(p, &flags))
+ return ret;
+ ret = send_signal(sig, info, p, group);
+ unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
return ret;
}
--
2.17.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists