> > +#ifdef CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR
[...]
> > +static inline void fork_connector(pid_t parent, pid_t child)
> > +{
[...]
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline void fork_connector(pid_t parent, pid_t child)
> > +{
> > + return;
> > +}
> > +#endif
[...]
> > @@ -1238,6 +1281,8 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
> > if (unlikely (current->ptrace &
> > PT_TRACE_VFORK_DONE))
> > ptrace_notify ((PTRACE_EVENT_VFORK_DONE <<
> > 8) | SIGTRAP);
> > }
> > +
> > + fork_connector(current->pid, p->pid);
> > } else {
> > free_pidmap(pid);
> > pid = PTR_ERR(p);
> Guillaume, I see that you are trying to discover if the kernel has
> CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR defined or not. In case CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR is
> not defined, you will call a "dummy" fork_connector (which just call
> "return"). But why you dont move the checking to where you call
> fork_connector? In this case, if CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR is not defined,
> nothing called, and of course you dont need a "dummy" fork_connector
> like in the above code.
>
> Just try something like this:
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR
> +
> + fork_connector(current->pid, p->pid);
> #endif
No, Guillaume did it right. Don't litter the code with useless #ifdefs
that turn one simple line of code into three for no good.
The dummy routine is optimized away by the compiler anyways.
Only the name "fork_connector()" might be discussed...
Tim
-
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/
