Re: [PATCH 1/4] signal: give SEND_SIG_FORCED more power to beatSIGNAL_UNKILLABLE

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Oleg,.

I can't provide any meaningful constructive criticism but have one
bike-shedding one.

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:00:21PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index c73c428..bfb2b97 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -1059,7 +1059,8 @@ static int __send_signal(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t,
>  
>  	assert_spin_locked(&t->sighand->siglock);
>  
> -	if (!prepare_signal(sig, t, from_ancestor_ns))
> +	if (!prepare_signal(sig, t,
> +			from_ancestor_ns || (info == SEND_SIG_FORCED)))

How about the following indentation instead?  :)

	if (!prepare_signal(sig, t,
	    from_ancestor_ns || (info == SEND_SIG_FORCED)))

Overall, the changes look sane to me but I haven't really thought
about it deeply.  Please feel free to add Reviewed-by for 2-4.

Thank you.

-- 
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/