[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080115121503.GA13573@clifford.at>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:15:06 +0100
From: Clifford Wolf <clifford@...fford.at>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: rlim in proc/<pid>/status
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:47:22PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> sound good for me.
> a few question please.
>
> > + for (i=0; i<RLIM_NLIMITS; i++) {
> > + if (rlim_names[i])
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "Rlim%s:\t", rlim_names[i]);
> > + else
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "Rlim%d:\t", i);
>
> this else is really necessary?
no. not with the current sources. maybe something like the following would
be better:
#if RLIM_NLIMITS != 15
# error New RLIM_NLIMITS add mising entries to rlim_names[]
#endif
> > + if (rlim[i].rlim_cur != ~0)
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "%lu\t", rlim[i].rlim_cur);
> > + else
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "-\t");
> > + if (rlim[i].rlim_max != ~0)
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "%lu\n", rlim[i].rlim_max);
> > + else
> > + buffer += sprintf(buffer, "-\n");
>
> Why do you don't use RLIM_INFINITY?
because I'm blind and didn't see it... ;-)
maybe it would also be better to output 'inf' instead of '-' in this case?
yours,
- clifford
--
The number of the beast - vi vi vi.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists