On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 08:48:16AM +0800, roy.qing...@gmail.com wrote: > From: Li RongQing <roy.qing...@gmail.com> > > !likely() is hard to be understood, and I do not know if compiler can > optimise this condition, but unlikely(!()) is clear > > Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <roy.qing...@gmail.com> > --- > kernel/signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c > index 8f0876f..6156cfa 100644 > --- a/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/kernel/signal.c > @@ -1571,7 +1571,7 @@ int send_sigqueue(struct sigqueue *q, struct > task_struct *t, int group) > BUG_ON(!(q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC)); > > ret = -1; > - if (!likely(lock_task_sighand(t, &flags))) > + if (unlikely(!lock_task_sighand(t, &flags)))
I wonder if you tested this code. Seems to be unlikely (punt not intended). Guenter > goto ret; > > ret = 1; /* the signal is ignored */ > -- > 1.7.10.4 > > -- > 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/ > > -- 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/
