Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:32:15 -0500 | From | KOSAKI Motohiro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] check_unsafe_exec: use while_each_thread() rather than next_thread() |
| |
(11/22/2013 3:24 PM), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 11/22, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: >> >> (11/22/2013 12:54 PM), Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>> next_thread() should be avoided, change check_unsafe_exec() >>> to use while_each_thread(). This also saves 32 bytes. >> >> Just curious. >> Why it should be avoided? Just for cleaner code? > > Nobody except signal->curr_target actually need next_thread-like > code, and > >> Or is there >> serious issue? > > We need to change (fix) this interface. This particular code is > fine, p == current. But in general the code like this can loop > forever if p exits and next_thread(t) can't reach the unhashed > thread.
That's enough and good reason.
Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
| |