Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] signal: sys_sigprocmask() needsretarget_shared_pending()

From: Tejun Heo
Date: Wed Apr 27 2011 - 09:04:15 EST


Hello,

Just my 5 cents.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 02:57:10PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Yes, sigprocmask(how) is ugly, but there are sys_rt_sigprocmask() and
> sys_sigprocmask() which have to handle these SIG_* operations anyway.
> So, I think we should do:
>
> 1. Almost all callers of sigprocmask() use SIG_SETMASK, we can
> simply change them to use set_current_blocked().

I agree. We don't need to worry about atomicity here, so there's no
reason to encode bitops (be it and/or or andn/xor) when the
determination of the new value can be simply done in the caller.

Thanks.

--
tejun
--
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/