[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110511142853.GE31633@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:28:53 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-throttle: fix typos on struct throtl_grp init code
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:14:02PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> 2011-05-11 (수), 09:30 -0400, Vivek Goyal:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:20:45PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > s/td/tg/
> >
> > I think jens would like to have little more changelog than that.
> >
>
> OK, let me clarify this first: My first patch was trivial but second one
> seems not. AFAICS it could affect when the bps/iops bandwidth change
> applies - maybe delayed to next @tg->disptime? - if there are concurrent
> cgroup init and limit change tasks, right? Or do you have something need
> to be included in the changelog?
Just say that when a new group is initialized, set tg->limits_changed =
false instead of setting td->limits_changed to false.
We do memset 0 on all newly allocated objects to this might not be
required at all.
So how about just getting rid of td->limits_changed assignments and
not do explicit tg->limits_changed as that is implicit in zeroing of
newly allocated object.
Thanks
Vivek
>
>
> > Otherwise looks good to me.
> >
> > Acked-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
> >
> > Vivek
>
> Thank you for the review and the comment.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Namhyung Kim
>
--
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