linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] cgroup/rstat: Cleanup cpu.stat once for all

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]

Message-ID: <Z5fpw2uVYGP9kf18@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 10:17:07 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bitao Hu <yaoma@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Chen Ridong <chenridong@...wei.com>,
	"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] cgroup/rstat: Cleanup cpu.stat once for all

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 01:25:11PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> There were efforts like b824766504e4 ("cgroup/rstat: add force idle show helper")
> to escape from #ifdef hells, and there could be new stats coming out in
> the future, let's clean it up once for all.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
> ---
>  kernel/cgroup/rstat.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

Is this materially better? The existing code has ifdef in one place which
the new code can't avoid. The new code is more complex and has more lines.
Does the balance get better with additions of new entries?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun