Re: [PATCH] Remove duplicate code in signal.c

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>]

"Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
> 
> Hello!
> 
> The following patch combines a bit of redundant code between
> force_sig_info() and force_sig_specific().  Tested on x86 and ppc64.

Some minor nitpicks ...

> +++ linux-2.6.14-rc2-rt7-force_sig/kernel/signal.c      2005-09-29 18:41:07.000000000 -0700
> @@ -920,8 +920,8 @@ force_sig_info(int sig, struct siginfo *
>         if (sigismember(&t->blocked, sig) || t->sighand->action[sig-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN) {
>                 t->sighand->action[sig-1].sa.sa_handler = SIG_DFL;
>                 sigdelset(&t->blocked, sig);

May be it would be more readable to do:

	if (handler == SIG_IGN)
		handler = SIG_DFL;

	if (sigismember(->blocked, sig)) // probably unneeded at all
		sigdelset(->blocked, sig);

> -               recalc_sigpending_tsk(t);
>         }
> +       recalc_sigpending_tsk(t);

I never understood why can't we just do:

	set_tsk_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING);

If this signal is not pending yet specific_send_siginfo() will
set this flag anyway.

> -       specific_send_sig_info(sig, (void *)2, t);
> -       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&t->sighand->siglock, flags);
> +       force_sig_info(sig, (void *)2, t);

Paul, if you think this patch should go into the -mm tree first,
could you rediff this patch against -mm ?

- 	specific_send_sig_info(sig, SEND_SIG_FORCED, t);
+	force_sig_info(sig, SEND_SIG_FORCED, t);

Oleg.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/