From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933985Ab0EUQiK (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2010 12:38:10 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:38637 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755950Ab0EUQiI (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2010 12:38:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 09:35:52 -0400 From: Andrew Morton To: David Howells Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Peter Zijlstra , Roland McGrath , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/2] misc: don't use sig->count Message-Id: <20100521093552.e4a77963.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <22494.1274436496@redhat.com> References: <20100323144836.GA10420@redhat.com> <22494.1274436496@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 21 May 2010 11:08:16 +0100 David Howells wrote: > Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > According to grep, get_nr_threads() becomes the only user of sig->count. > > Are these two patches going upstream in this window? > Sure, unless there's a reason not to do this?