On 12/23, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > +static inline pid_t task_ppid_nr_ns(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pid_namespace *ns) > +{ > + pid_t pid; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + pid = pid_alive(tsk) ? > + task_pid_nr_ns(rcu_dereference(tsk->real_parent), ns) : 0; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + return pid; > +} I do not really mind, but perhaps pid_t pid = 0; rcu_read_lock(); if (pid_alive(task)) pid = task_pid_nr_ns(rcu_dereference(tsk->real_parent); rcu_read_unlock(); return pid; looks a bit cleaner. > +static inline pid_t task_ppid_nr(struct task_struct *tsk) > +{ > + pid_t pid; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + pid = pid_alive(tsk) ? > + task_pid_nr(rcu_dereference(tsk->real_parent)) : 0; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + return pid; > +} It could simply do return task_ppid_nr_ns(tsk, init_pid_ns); but again, I won't argue. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html