I am busy now, can't review, just picked a random patch from this series...
On 05/28, Christian Brauner wrote: > do_signal_stop() already returns in the if branch so there's no need to > keep the else branch around. OK, but for what??? Do you think this change makes the code more readable? more clean? or what? I do not really care but to me these "if/else" branches make this code more symmetrical, so I don't understand the purpose. > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <[email protected]> > --- > v0->v1: > * patch unchanged > --- > kernel/signal.c | 14 +++++++------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c > index a628b56415e6..d1914439f144 100644 > --- a/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/kernel/signal.c > @@ -2214,14 +2214,14 @@ static bool do_signal_stop(int signr) > /* Now we don't run again until woken by SIGCONT or SIGKILL */ > freezable_schedule(); > return true; > - } else { > - /* > - * While ptraced, group stop is handled by STOP trap. > - * Schedule it and let the caller deal with it. > - */ > - task_set_jobctl_pending(current, JOBCTL_TRAP_STOP); > - return false; > } > + > + /* > + * While ptraced, group stop is handled by STOP trap. > + * Schedule it and let the caller deal with it. > + */ > + task_set_jobctl_pending(current, JOBCTL_TRAP_STOP); > + return false; > } > > /** > -- > 2.17.0 >
