[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220105193504.GD6464@blackbody.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 20:35:04 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, lizefan.x@...edance.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cgroup/rstat: check updated_next only for root
On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 12:09:32AM +0000, Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com> wrote:
> This means we can remove the check on ->updated_next, if we make sure
> the subtree from @root is on list, which could be done by checking
> updated_next for root.
Nice refactoring.
> @@ -96,9 +97,12 @@ static struct cgroup *cgroup_rstat_cpu_pop_updated(struct cgroup *pos,
> * We're gonna walk down to the first leaf and visit/remove it. We
> * can pick whatever unvisited node as the starting point.
> */
> - if (!pos)
> + if (!pos) {
> pos = root;
> - else
> + // return NULL if this subtree is not on-list
> + if (!cgroup_rstat_cpu(pos, cpu)->updated_next)
> + return NULL;
> + } else
+ /* return NULL if this subtree is not on-list */
Just a coding style nitpick.
The patch is otherwise
Reviewed-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists