Paul Menage wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> --- a/include/linux/cgroup.h >> +++ b/include/linux/cgroup.h >> @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ struct cftype { >> >> */ >> int (*write_s64) (struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cftype *cft, s64 val); >> >> - void (*trigger) (struct cgroup *cgrp, unsigned int event); >> + int (*trigger) (struct cgroup *cgrp, unsigned int event); > > To be more name-compatible with the other read_X/write_X functions, > how about write_void rather than trigger? Because it's not a write actually, this is just some kick-up which came from the user space. And the fact, that it is triggered via the sys_write is just a VFS-based API constraints. Besides, if we ever have a binary API with cgroups, this trigger can be triggered :) via some other system call, rather than write. > Paul > _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers