On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 10:23:30AM -0700, Robert Love wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:19, 'joe.korty@ccur.com' wrote:
>
> > I posted a fix for this a month ago that was ignored. Which is a
> > good thing, since now that I look at it again, I don't care for the
> > approach I took nor does it appear to be complete.
>
> Ah, sorry for missing it. Other than that tertiary statement inside an
> if ;) my patch is about the same.
>
> Why do you think it is incomplete? It looks correct to me.
It may be better to add it to __activate_task() rather than after the
single activate_task() use. At the time I wrote the patch I did not
think to look at the five __activate_task() calls to see if they each
needed the test. By me not looking, my patch is automatically
incorrect, even if it turns out to be correct.
Joe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 23 2003 - 22:00:30 EST