On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:09:25 -0700 Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 2:58 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > CC'ed to Paul Menage and Li Zefan. > > == > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > When cgroup subsystem use ID (ss->use_id==1), each css's ID is assigned > > after successful call of ->create(). css_ID is tightly coupled with > > css struct itself but it is allocated by ->create() call, IOW, > > per-subsystem special allocations. > > > > To know css_id before creation, this patch adds id_attached() callback. > > after css_ID allocation. This will be used by memory cgroup's quick lookup > > routine. > > > > Maybe you can think of other implementations as > > - pass ID to ->create() > > or > > - add post_create() > > etc... > > But when considering dirtiness of codes, this straightforward patch seems > > good to me. If someone wants post_create(), this patch can be replaced. > > I think I'd prefer the approach where any necessary css_ids are > allocated prior to calling any create methods (which gives the > additional advantage of removing the need to roll back partial > creation of a cgroup in the event of alloc_css_id() failing) and then > passed in to the create() method. The main cgroups framework would > still be responsible for actually filling the css->id field with the > allocated id. > Hmm, sure. I'll change the ->create() interface. O.K. ? Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>