> How about this?
>
> val = !!val;
>
> /*
> * This follows the same hierarchy restrictions than
> * mem_cgroup_hierarchy_write()
> */
> if (!parent || !parent->use_hierarchy) {
> if (list_empty(&cgroup->children))
> memcg->kmem_independent_accounting = val;
> else
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> else
> return -EINVAL;
>
> return 0;
Inverting the tests gives easier to read code:
if (parent && parent->user_hierarchy)
return -EINVAL;
if (!list_empty(&cgroup->children))
return -EBUSY;
memcg->kmem_independent_accounting = val != 0;
return 0;
NFI about the logic...
On the face of it the tests don't seem related to each other
or to the assignment!
David
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href