[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111220233502.GN10752@google.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:35:02 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cgroup: separate out cgroup_attach_proc error
handling code
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:14:33PM -0800, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
> @@ -2067,9 +2067,10 @@ int cgroup_attach_proc(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct task_struct *leader)
> read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
>
> /* methods shouldn't be called if no task is actually migrating */
> - retval = 0;
> - if (!group_size)
> + if (!group_size) {
> + retval = 0;
> goto out_free_group_list;
> + }
Eh... I don't think this is an improvement. It's just different.
> @@ -2126,20 +2127,20 @@ int cgroup_attach_proc(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct task_struct *leader)
> */
> synchronize_rcu();
> cgroup_wakeup_rmdir_waiter(cgrp);
> - retval = 0;
> + flex_array_free(group);
> + return 0;
Hmm... maybe goto out_free_group_list? Duplicating cleanup on success
and failure paths can lead future updaters forget one of them. The
exit path in this function isn't pretty but I don't think the proposed
patch improves it either.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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