Re: [PATCH] signal, procfs: lock_task_sighand() do not needrcu_read_lock()

[Alexey Dobriyan]

On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 08:29:15PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >
> > lock_task_sighand() make sure task->sighand is being protected,
> > so we do not need rcu_read_lock().
> > [ exec() will get task->sighand->siglock before change task->sighand! ]
> >
> > But code using rcu_read_lock() _just_ to protect lock_task_sighand()
> > only appear in procfs. (and some code in procfs use lock_task_sighand()
> > without such redundant protection.)
> 
> Yes, the patch looks correct.

Yeah, applied to proc.git
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/