[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <535616D9.8060702@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 15:14:33 +0800
From: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
To: Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@...il.com>
CC: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
<containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlb_cgroup: explicitly init the early_init field
On 2014/4/22 15:01, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> Hi, hillf,
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com> wrote:
>> But other fields still missed, if any. Fair?
>
> yep, it is not fair.
>
> Sure for this global variable struct, if not initailized, its all
> fields will be initialized
> to 0 or null(depending on its type). The point here is no to deprive
> the rights of
> compiler/linker of doing this initialization, it is mainly for
> documentation reason.
> Actually this field's value would affect how ->css_alloc should implemented.
>
> Concretely, if early_init is nonzero, then ->css_alloc *must not* call kzalloc,
> because in cgroup implementation, ->css_alloc will be called earlier before
> mm_init().
>
> I don't think that the value of one field(early_init) has a so subtle
> restrition on the
> another field(css_alloc) is a good thing, but since it is there,
> docment it should
> be needed.
>
I don't see how things can be improved by initializing it to 0 explicitly,
if anything needs to be improved.
--
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