[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180601132239.4421-8-christian@brauner.io>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 15:22:29 +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 v2 07/17] signal: make sig_handler_ignored() return bool
sig_handler_ignored() already behaves like a boolean function. Let's
actually declare it as such too.
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
---
v1->v2:
* unchanged
v0->v1:
* patch added
---
kernel/signal.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index bbd15e984a84..62e2586f961e 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -65,11 +65,11 @@ static void __user *sig_handler(struct task_struct *t, int sig)
return t->sighand->action[sig - 1].sa.sa_handler;
}
-static int sig_handler_ignored(void __user *handler, int sig)
+static inline bool sig_handler_ignored(void __user *handler, int sig)
{
/* Is it explicitly or implicitly ignored? */
return handler == SIG_IGN ||
- (handler == SIG_DFL && sig_kernel_ignore(sig));
+ (handler == SIG_DFL && sig_kernel_ignore(sig));
}
static int sig_task_ignored(struct task_struct *t, int sig, bool force)
--
2.17.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists