On 02/14, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Might aswell stick the discmiss into what was dequeue_signal_lock(). > Which at that point should get a saner name (maybe thread_dequeue_signal ?) > and lose all argument except maybe task_struct No, task_struct argument should die, I think. It is misleading. spin_lock(tsk->sighand->siglock) is simply wrong unless tsk == current. And dequeue_signal() assumes that tsk == current too, otherwise recalc_sigpending() is wrong. Oleg. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
