linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/7] mm: memcontrol: switch to rstat

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]

Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 11:26:32 -0500
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] mm: memcontrol: switch to rstat

On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 05:47:26PM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:47:45PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >  	for_each_node(node) {
> >  		struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pn = memcg->nodeinfo[node];
> > +		unsigned long stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS] = {0, };
>                                                               ^^
> I'd drop the comma here. It seems that "{0}" version is way more popular
> over the mm code and in the kernel in general.

Is there a downside to the comma? I'm finding more { 0, } than { 0 }
in mm code, and at least kernel-wide it seems both are acceptable
(although { 0 } is more popular overall).

I don't care much either way. I can change it in v2 if there is one.