Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:42:34 -0300 | From | Glauber Costa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] per-cgroup tcp buffers control |
| |
On 09/18/2011 03:58 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:33:58PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:11:32PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:46:12PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote: >>>> +int tcp_init_cgroup_fill(struct proto *prot, struct cgroup *cgrp, >>>> + struct cgroup_subsys *ss) >>>> +{ >>>> + prot->enter_memory_pressure = tcp_enter_memory_pressure; >>>> + prot->memory_allocated = memory_allocated_tcp; >>>> + prot->prot_mem = tcp_sysctl_mem; >>>> + prot->sockets_allocated = sockets_allocated_tcp; >>>> + prot->memory_pressure = memory_pressure_tcp; >>> >>> No fancy formatting, please. >>> >> >> What's wrong with having fancy formatting? It's indeed easier to read >> when members are assigned this way. It's always up to maintainer to >> choose what he prefers, but I see nothing wrong in such style (if only it >> doesn't break the style of the whole file). > > You have to remove this indenting if you'll reorganize code (e.g. move > part under if(...)). > IMO, it reduces code maintainability. > As I said, I don't care, so I'll change. But I have to say I disagree with your statement.
It is a pack of assignments, so if you reorganize this code, two things can happen: 1) It is not moved to a new ident level -> It keeps being a pack of assignments, and you don't really need to change it. 2) It is moved to a new ident level -> You have to touch it anyway...
| |