Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755764AbaA2Epe (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2014 23:45:34 -0500 Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:38372 "EHLO mail-la0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751112AbaA2Epd (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2014 23:45:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1390895840.8373.2.camel@beeld> <20140128164320.GB7596@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:45:31 +0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Do we really need curr_target in signal_struct ? From: Rakib Mullick To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Rakib Mullick wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> On 01/28, Rakib Mullick wrote: >> >> You could simply do while_each_thread(p, t) to find a thread which >> wants_signal(..). >> > Yes, while_each_thread() is much nicer than get_nr_thread(), thanks for > the pointer. > Or, should we use for_each_thread()? Just noticed that, you've plan to remove while_each_thread(). Thanks, Rakib -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/