Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm: hwpoison: use do_send_sig_info() instead of force_sig() (Re: PMEM error-handling forces SIGKILL causes kernel panic) | From | Jane Chu <> | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:07:09 -0800 |
| |
On 1/16/2019 3:32 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > Hi Jane, > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 09:56:02AM -0800, Jane Chu wrote: >> Hi, Naoya, >> >> On 1/16/2019 1:30 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: >> >> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c >> index 7c72f2a95785..831be5ff5f4d 100644 >> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c >> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c >> @@ -372,7 +372,8 @@ static void kill_procs(struct list_head *to_kill, int forcekill, bool fail, >> if (fail || tk->addr_valid == 0) { >> pr_err("Memory failure: %#lx: forcibly killing %s:%d because of failure to unmap corrupted page\n", >> pfn, tk->tsk->comm, tk->tsk->pid); >> - force_sig(SIGKILL, tk->tsk); >> + do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_PRIV, >> + tk->tsk, PIDTYPE_PID); >> } >> >> >> Since we don't care the return from do_send_sig_info(), would you mind to >> prefix it with (void) ? > > Sorry, I'm not sure about the benefit to do casting the return value > just being ignored, so personally I'd like keeping the code simple. > Do you have some in mind?
It's just coding style I'm used to, no big deal. Up to you to decide. :)
thanks, -jane
> > - Naoya >
| |