signals: Fix more rcu assumptions

Browse source

1) Remove the misleading comment in __sigqueue_alloc() which claims
   that holding a spinlock is equivalent to rcu_read_lock().

2) Add a rcu_read_lock/unlock around the __task_cred() access
   in __sigqueue_alloc()

This needs to be revisited to remove the remaining users of
read_lock(&tasklist_lock) but that's outside the scope of this patch.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
LKML-Reference: <20091210004703.269843657@linutronix.de>

...

This commit is contained in:

Thomas Gleixner 2009-12-10 00:53:21 +00:00

parent 14d8c9f3c0

commit 7cf7db8df0

1 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions

Show all changes Ignore whitespace when comparing lines Ignore changes in amount of whitespace Ignore changes in whitespace at EOL

Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8

kernel/signal.c

View file