On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > cgroup_attach_proc() behaves differently from cgroup_attach_task() in > the following aspects. > > * All hooks are invoked even if no task is actually being moved. > > * ->can_attach_task() is called for all tasks in the group whether the > new cgrp is different from the current cgrp or not; however, > ->attach_task() is skipped if new equals new. This makes the calls > asymmetric. > > This patch improves old cgroup handling in cgroup_attach_proc() by > looking up the current cgroup at the head, recording it in the flex > array along with the task itself, and using it to remove the above two > differences. This will also ease further changes. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> With the later cgroup_taskset changes making use of the same flex array, I guess I agree that leaving all the tasks in the array makes sense. > + int retval, i, group_size, nr_todo; I'd be inclined to call "nr_todo" something like "nr_migrating_tasks" for clarity. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
