From a6bebbc87a8c16eabb6bd5c6fd2d994be0236fba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lai Jiangshan Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 00:51:15 +0400 Subject: [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 [ok from Oleg] Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan --- kernel/sched_debug.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel') diff --git a/kernel/sched_debug.c b/kernel/sched_debug.c index bbe6b31c3c5..ad958c1ec70 100644 --- a/kernel/sched_debug.c +++ b/kernel/sched_debug.c @@ -333,12 +333,10 @@ void proc_sched_show_task(struct task_struct *p, struct seq_file *m) unsigned long flags; int num_threads = 1; - rcu_read_lock(); if (lock_task_sighand(p, &flags)) { num_threads = atomic_read(&p->signal->count); unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags); } - rcu_read_unlock(); SEQ_printf(m, "%s (%d, #threads: %d)\n", p->comm, p->pid, num_threads); SEQ_printf(m, -- cgit v1.2.3