On 02/14, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Might aswell stick the discmiss into what was dequeue_signal_lock(). > Which at that point should get a saner name (maybe thread_dequeue_signal ?) > and lose all argument except maybe task_struct
No, task_struct argument should die, I think. It is misleading. spin_lock(tsk->sighand->siglock) is simply wrong unless tsk == current. And dequeue_signal() assumes that tsk == current too, otherwise recalc_sigpending() is wrong. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
