[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E756666.9000009@parallels.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 00:32:54 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
CC: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <paul@...lmenage.org>,
<lizf@...fujitsu.com>, <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<gthelen@...gle.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] per-cgroup tcp buffers control
On 09/17/2011 03:33 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:11:32PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:46:12PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>> +int tcp_init_cgroup_fill(struct proto *prot, struct cgroup *cgrp,
>>> + struct cgroup_subsys *ss)
>>> +{
>>> + prot->enter_memory_pressure = tcp_enter_memory_pressure;
>>> + prot->memory_allocated = memory_allocated_tcp;
>>> + prot->prot_mem = tcp_sysctl_mem;
>>> + prot->sockets_allocated = sockets_allocated_tcp;
>>> + prot->memory_pressure = memory_pressure_tcp;
>>
>> No fancy formatting, please.
>>
>
> What's wrong with having fancy formatting? It's indeed easier to read
> when members are assigned this way. It's always up to maintainer to
> choose what he prefers, but I see nothing wrong in such style (if only it
> doesn't break the style of the whole file).
>
> Cyrill
I am in agreement with Cyrill, but I really, really don't care...
--
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