On 10/06, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > Perhaps, we should add the comment to explain that both SI_FROMUSER() > > and si_fromuser() are only valid in the sending pathes. > > Yes. Also now that you put them both in a sentence together, it is clear > that it is insane to have two different things with those two names that > differ only in capitalization. I think this doesn't matter because we need more cleanups. As for naming I agree, si_fromuser() sucks and I'd be happy to send the patch which renames it (or re-send these 2 patches). The problem is, both SI_FROMUSER() and SI_FROMKERNEL() must die imho. In fact I think they should never exist. SI_FROMUSER(siptr) ((siptr)->si_code <= 0) note "<=", this means this helper is unuseable. What we need is another macro/inline which checks "si_code < 0" (or >= 0 depending on naming), this helper should be used by sys_sigqueueinfo/etc which can not not use SI_FROMXXX() because SI_USER is rightly forbidden. __send_signal() can use the new helper too. Other cleanups which imho makes sense: - rename SEND_SIG_XXX - redefine them to make sure SEND_SIG_NOINFO != NULL Oleg. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
