On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 09:48:09AM -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Ben Blum <bblum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Convert cgroup_attach_proc to use flex_array. > > > > From: Ben Blum <bblum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The cgroup_attach_proc implementation requires a pre-allocated array to store > > task pointers to atomically move a thread-group, but asking for a monolithic > > array with kmalloc() may be unreliable for very large groups. Using flex_array > > provides the same functionality with less risk of failure. > > > > This is a post-patch for cgroup-procs-write.patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Blum <bblum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Looks fine from a correctness point of view, but I'd be inclined to > reduce the verbosity - rather than > > tsk = flex_array_get_ptr(group, i); > BUG_ON(tsk == NULL); > retval = ss->can_attach_task(cgrp, tsk); > > I'd just have > > retval = ss->can_attach_task(cgrp, flex_array_get_ptr(group, i)); > > I don't think you need to be so defensive about flex_array's behaviour. > > Paul > hmm, in this case that change would make it cross 80 columns (and I liked consistency). ;) I've removed the BUG_ONs, though. -- Ben _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
