Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Sep 2010 20:49:09 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH][-mm] memcg : memory cgroup cpu hotplug support update. | From | Hiroyuki Kamezawa <> |
| |
2010/9/17 Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2010-09-16 16:17:27]: > >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:22:04 +0900 >> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: >> >> > This naming is from mem_cgroup_walk_tree(). Now we have >> > >> > mem_cgroup_walk_tree(); >> > mem_cgroup_walk_all(); >> > >> > Rename both ? But it should be in separated patch. >> > >> >> Considering a bit ...but.. >> >> #define for_each_mem_cgroup(mem) \ >> for (mem = mem_cgroup_get_first(); \ >> mem; \ >> mem = mem_cgroup_get_next(mem);) \ >> >> seems to need some helper functions. I'll consider about this clean up >> but it requires some amount of patch because css_get()/css_put()/rcu...etc.. >> are problematic. >> > > Why does this need to be a macro (I know we use this for lists and > other places), assuming for now we don't use the iterator pattern, we > can rename mem_cgroup_walk_all() to for_each_mem_cgroup(). >
When I see for_each in the kernel source, I expect iterator and macro. When I see "walk" in the kernel source, I expect callback and visit function.
Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |