On 07/08, Georgia Garcia wrote: > > On Sun, 2026-07-05 at 20:48 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 07/05, Bradley Morgan wrote: > > > > > > > SEND_SIG_NOINFO is defined as ((struct kernel_siginfo *) 0), so passing > > > > NULL works, but: > > > > > > > > - this works "by accident" and looks as if the caller doesn't understand > > > > the signal sending API. > > > > > > > > - more importantly, this hides the usage of SEND_SIG_NOINFO from grep, > > > > and this is really bad. > > > - also drop the now redundant (void) > > > > Yes, but the "void" cast was never necessary, I guess. > > > > and just in case... To me the usage of SEND_SIG_NOINFO here doesn't look > > right with > > or without this change. Perhaps I am wrong, but please lets not discuss > > this right > > now, this connects to other cleanups I have in mind. > > > > Yes, I agree. Perhaps SEND_SIG_PRIV would be more appropriate here.
Yes, this is what I meant. And I think the same is true for most of (all?) users of send_sig(sig, task, priv = 0), at least when task is current. I'll return to this later. Thanks for your ACK! Oleg.
