On 04/24, Christian Brauner wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 08:52:38PM +0800, Zhenliang Wei wrote:
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov oleg@redhat.com
Yes, but ...
Reported-by: kbuild test robot lkp@intel.com
Hmm, really?
--- a/kernel/signal.c +++ b/kernel/signal.c @@ -2441,6 +2441,8 @@ bool get_signal(struct ksignal *ksig) if (signal_group_exit(signal)) { ksig->info.si_signo = signr = SIGKILL; sigdelset(¤t->pending.signal, SIGKILL);
trace_signal_deliver(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO,
&sighand->action[signr - 1]);
Hm, sorry for being the really nitpicky person here. Just for the sake of consistency how about we do either:
trace_signal_deliver(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO,
&sighand->action[SIGKILL - 1]);
or
trace_signal_deliver(signr, SEND_SIG_NOINFO,
&sighand->action[signr - 1]);
Agreed!
Oleg.