lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: hwpoison: use do_send_sig_info() instead of force_sig() (Re: PMEM error-handling forces SIGKILL causes kernel panic)
From
Date


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
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-17 02:08    [W:0.179 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site