From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758647Ab1DYRDV (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:03:21 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37539 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754905Ab1DYRDV (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:03:21 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:02:00 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Tejun Heo Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , "Nikita V. Youshchenko" , Matt Fleming , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] signal: retarget_shared_pending: consider shared/unblocked signals only Message-ID: <20110425170200.GA18363@redhat.com> References: <20110418134421.GA15951@redhat.com> <20110418134501.GC15951@redhat.com> <20110425105229.GE17734@mtj.dyndns.org> <20110425152040.GA14934@redhat.com> <20110425161951.GA30828@mtj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110425161951.GA30828@mtj.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/25, Tejun Heo wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 05:20:40PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > This series is already in -mm, I'd like to avoid another resend. So I'll > > send another patch which addresses your comments on top of this series. > > > > OK? > > Why not route through the signal/ptrace tree? I did these changes against the Linus's tree to simplify the review, and because there are completely orthogonal to ptrace changes. Also, I like very much the fact -mm has users/testers. In fact, there are trivial conflicts with the ptrace branch. I think ptrace should be flushed first, so I'll rebase this "sigprocmask" branch when I address all comments. Or do you think I should merge these changes into ptrace branch? I'd like to keep them separate, but I am not sure if I should... Oleg.