Re: [rfc][patch] Avoid taking global tasklist_lock for singlethreadedprocess at getrusage()

[Andrew Morton]

Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> 
> > +	need_lock = !(p == current && thread_group_empty(p));
> 
> Isnt 
> 
> need_lock = (p != current || !thread_group_empty(b))
> 
> clearer?

I was actually going to change it to

	if (p != current || !thread_group_empty(p))
		need_lock = 1;

a) because my brain works that way and 

b) To make the currently-unneeded initialisation of need_lock do
   something useful ;)

-
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/