Re: [PATCH 4/5] vt: Update spawnpid to use a task_ref.

[ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)]

Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> writes:

> On Ne 29-01-06 00:33:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> This is a classic example of a random kernel subsystem
>> holding a pid for purposes of signalling it later.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>>  drivers/char/keyboard.c |    8 ++++----
>>  drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c |    5 +++--
>>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> 
>> 7ed8301463a49ad03f8c9de2bbf8c41a5d9843ea
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/keyboard.c b/drivers/char/keyboard.c
>> index 8b603b2..4e1f2e0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/keyboard.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/keyboard.c
>> @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ struct kbd_struct kbd_table[MAX_NR_CONSO
>>  static struct kbd_struct *kbd = kbd_table;
>>  static struct kbd_struct kbd0;
>>  
>> -int spawnpid, spawnsig;
>> +TASK_REF(spawnpid);
>
> Could we get some nicer syntax of declaration? This does not look like
> declaration, and looks ugly to my eyes.

Any suggestions?

Does 
struct task_ref *spawnpid = &init_tref;

I modeled it after how we did this is done for lists.

Eric

-
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/