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 ESMTP id 497AD6B004F for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:26:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.69]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n610R56Z023281 for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 01:27:06 +0100 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (anab38.prod.google.com [10.100.53.38]) by wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n610R3Ks009682 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:27:03 -0700 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b38so235299ana.9 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:27:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090701090959.4cbdb03e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090630180109.f137c10e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090630180344.d7274644.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830906300215q56bda5ccnc99862211dc65289@mail.gmail.com> <20090630182304.8049039c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830906300918i3e3f8611r6d6fb7873c720c70@mail.gmail.com> <20090701084037.2c3f53f7.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <20090701090959.4cbdb03e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:27:02 -0700 Message-ID: <6599ad830906301727wcb6b292uc3c46451f8844392@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cgroup: exlclude release rmdir From: Paul Menage Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Daisuke Nishimura , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" List-ID: On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:09 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 08:40:37 +0900 > Daisuke Nishimura wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:18:03 -0700, Paul Menage wrote: >> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:23 AM, KAMEZAWA >> > Hiroyuki wrote: >> > > This patch is _not_ tested by Nishimura. >> > >> > True, but it's functionally identical to, and simpler than, the one >> > that was tested. >> > >> I agree. >> I'll test with both of these patches folded. >> > Hm,ok. I'll post merged one today. > But I don't like cosmeticized bugfix patch ;( > It only looks "cosmeticized" because of the evolution of your fix. The first patch added a new function that exposed internal details of cgroups, and the second patch removes the addition in favour of a different new function that doesn't expose internal details as much; a single patch that just adds the simpler new function is easier to judge as intuitively correct (separately from Daisuke's testing) than one that exposes more internal details. Paul -- 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