Re: [PATCH v11 4/8] fork: Add USER_WORKER flag to ignore signals

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/2/23 6:19 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 3:25 PM Mike Christie
> <michael.christie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> +       if (args->worker_flags & USER_WORKER_SIG_IGN)
>> +               ignore_signals(p);
> 
> Same comment as for the other case.
> 
> There are real reasons to avoid bitfields:
> 
>  - you can't pass addresses to them around
> 
>  - it's easier to read or assign multiple fields in one go
> 
>  - they are horrible for ABI issues due to the exact bit ordering and
> padding being very subtle
> 
> but none of those issues are relevant here, where it's a kernel-internal ABI.
> 
> All these use-cases seem to actually be testing one bit at a time, and
> the "assignments" are structure initializers for which named bitfields
> are actually perfect and just make the initializer more legible.
> 

Thanks for the comments. I see what you mean and have fixed those instances and
updated kthread as well.

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux