Lai Jiangshan a6bebbc87a [PATCH] signal, procfs: some lock_task_sighand() users do not need rcu_read_lock()
lock_task_sighand() make sure task->sighand is being protected,
so we do not need rcu_read_lock().
[ exec() will get task->sighand->siglock before change task->sighand! ]

But code using rcu_read_lock() _just_ to protect lock_task_sighand()
only appear in procfs. (and some code in procfs use lock_task_sighand()
without such redundant protection.)

Other subsystem may put lock_task_sighand() into rcu_read_lock()
critical region, but these rcu_read_lock() are used for protecting
"for_each_process()", "find_task_by_vpid()" etc. , not for protecting
lock_task_sighand().

Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
[ok from Oleg]
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
2008-10-10 04:18:57 +04:00
..
2008-05-01 08:03:59 -07:00
2008-07-26 20:53:20 -04:00
2008-07-28 16:30:21 -07:00
2008-03-30 14:18:41 -07:00
2008-07-28 14:37:38 +02:00
2007-07-16 09:05:50 -07:00
2008-07-26 12:00:09 -07:00
2008-08-13 12:55:10 +02:00
2008-09-02 19:21:40 -07:00
2008-08-25 17:39:57 +02:00
2008-08-11 14:49:29 +02:00
2007-07-16 09:05:50 -07:00
2008-08-19 20:37:07 -07:00
2008-02-06 10:41:02 -08:00
2008-07-25 10:53:45 -07:00
2008-04-30 08:29:53 -07:00
2008-02-08 09:22:31 -08:00