Re: [PATCH 2/6] cgroup: improve old cgroup handling in cgroup_attach_proc()

[Paul Menage]

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> cgroup_attach_proc() behaves differently from cgroup_attach_task() in
> the following aspects.
>
> * All hooks are invoked even if no task is actually being moved.
>
> * ->can_attach_task() is called for all tasks in the group whether the
>  new cgrp is different from the current cgrp or not; however,
>  ->attach_task() is skipped if new equals new.  This makes the calls
>  asymmetric.
>
> This patch improves old cgroup handling in cgroup_attach_proc() by
> looking up the current cgroup at the head, recording it in the flex
> array along with the task itself, and using it to remove the above two
> differences.  This will also ease further changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

With the later cgroup_taskset changes making use of the same flex
array, I guess I agree that leaving all the tasks in the array makes
sense.

> +       int retval, i, group_size, nr_todo;

I'd be inclined to call "nr_todo" something like "nr_migrating_tasks"
for clarity.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/