linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] blk-cgroup:be able to remove the record of unplugged device

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: <CAJniumW-+aQE0jWr0NhvTUuxLDiP27bQaZVmVORpnNHvPqp0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jul 2011 11:40:26 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@...fujitsu.com>, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	wanlong.gao@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] blk-cgroup:be able to remove the record of unplugged device

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> They have but the context where temp is being used to figure out if it
> is a deletion rule is generic. So if a rule is being deleted (be it
> weight, bps or iops), we are going to parse it early in the function.
> So in that context not calling it "weight" makes sense to me.
>
> We use bps, iops names only after knowing the value type.

Fair enough - but in that case, wouldn't it make sense to make "temp"
a u64 and just parse it once, rather than reparsing the iops/bps later
in their switch cases?

Paul
--
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/