On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:37:23 -0200
Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/08/2011 11:21 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Hm, why you check val != parent->kmem_independent_accounting ?
> >
> > if (parent&& parent->use_hierarchy)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > ?
> >
> > BTW, you didn't check this cgroup has children or not.
> > I think
> >
> > if (this_cgroup->use_hierarchy&&
> > !list_empty(this_cgroup->childlen))
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> 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;
>
seems good to me.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>