On 10/15, Jens Axboe wrote: > > This is in preparation for maintaining signal_pending() as the decider > of whether or not a schedule() loop should be broken, or continue > sleeping. This is different than the core signal use cases, where we > really want to know if an actual signal is pending or not. > task_sigpending() returns non-zero if TIF_SIGPENDING is set. > > Only core kernel use cases should care about the distinction between > the two, make sure those use the task_sigpending() helper. > > Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
the same, Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
