linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] cgroup: ID notification call back

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100825091747.f6ea9e0e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:17:47 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Cc:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	gthelen@...gle.com, m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cgroup: ID notification call back

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:11:22 -0700
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe pass the id number to id_attached() is better.
> >
> > And actually the @ss argument is not necessary, because the memcg's
> > id_attached() handler of course knows it's dealing with the memory
> > cgroup subsystem.
> >
> > So I suspect we can just remove all the @ss from all the callbacks..
> 
> Yes, I don't think any subsystem uses these. They dated originally
> from when, as part of the initial cgroups framwork, I included a
> library that could wrap a mostly-unmodified CKRM resource controller
> into a cgroups subsystem, at which point the callback code didn't
> necessarily know which subsystem it was being called for. But that's
> obsolete now.
> 

Hmm, then, should I remove it in the next version, or leave it as it is
now and should be removed by another total clean up ?

(IOW, mixture of inconsistent interface is O.K. ?)

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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/