lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] signals: Avoid unnecessary taking of sighand->siglock
On 09/23, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>
> + /*
> + * In case the signal mask hasn't changed, we won't need to take
> + * the lock. The current blocked mask can be modified by other CPUs.
> + * To be safe, we need to do an atomic read without lock. As a result,
> + * this check will only be done on 64-bit architectures.
> + */
> + if ((_NSIG_WORDS == 1) &&
> + (READ_ONCE(tsk->blocked.sig[0]) == newset->sig[0]))
> + return;

so in case you missed my reply to V1, I still think that the comment is wrong
and you should drop the _NSIG_WORDS check.

Oleg.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-26 18:29    [W:0.091 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site