On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 01:04:37PM -0700, Yu Zhao wrote:
> @@ -2498,22 +2449,24 @@ static int mem_cgroup_resize_memsw_limit(struct
> mem_cgroup *memcg,
> }
>
> mutex_lock(&memcg_limit_mutex);
> - if (limit < memcg->memory.limit) {
> + inverted = memsw ? limit < memcg->memory.limit :
> + limit > memcg->memsw.limit;
> + if (inverted)
> mutex_unlock(&memcg_limit_mutex);
> ret = -EINVAL;
> break;
> }For some reason, I liked this patch more without this extra variable :-)
