From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 937016B01F0 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 20:19:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.76]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o7P0MjIZ010024 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:22:45 +0900 Received: from smail (m6 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE66745DE52 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:22:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.96]) by m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2BC045DE50 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:22:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CB951DB801F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:22:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 368681DB8017 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:22:44 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:17:47 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cgroup: ID notification call back Message-Id: <20100825091747.f6ea9e0e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20100820185552.426ff12e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100820185816.1dbcd53a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <4C738B34.6070602@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Paul Menage Cc: Li Zefan , linux-mm@kvack.org, "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , gthelen@google.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , kamezawa.hiroyuki@gmail.com List-ID: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:11:22 -0700 Paul Menage wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Li Zefan wrote: > > > > Maybe pass the id number to id_attached() is better. > > > > And actually the @ss argument is not necessary, because the memcg's > > id_attached() handler of course knows it's dealing with the memory > > cgroup subsystem. > > > > So I suspect we can just remove all the @ss from all the callbacks.. > > Yes, I don't think any subsystem uses these. They dated originally > from when, as part of the initial cgroups framwork, I included a > library that could wrap a mostly-unmodified CKRM resource controller > into a cgroups subsystem, at which point the callback code didn't > necessarily know which subsystem it was being called for. But that's > obsolete now. > Hmm, then, should I remove it in the next version, or leave it as it is now and should be removed by another total clean up ? (IOW, mixture of inconsistent interface is O.K. ?) Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org