Re: [PATCH 2/5] exec: simplify ->sighand switching

> There is no any reason to do recalc_sigpending() after changing ->sighand.
> To begin with, recalc_sigpending() does not take ->sighand into account.

I agree.  I think that call dates from before some other cleanups in that
code, when ->signal was changed there.  At the time, it was the most
conservative change to leave recalc_sigpending in case the side effects it
used to have were desireable (we've since decided to change those anyway).


Thanks,
Roland
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH 2/5] exec: simplify ->sighand switching
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/5] exec: simplify the new ->sighand allocation
• Previous by thread: [PATCH 2/5] exec: simplify ->sighand switching
• Next by thread: [PATCH 3/5] exec: simplify the new ->sighand allocation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]