Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcu...@openvz.org> wrote:
>On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 06:09:53PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 01:52:32AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 12:11:44AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> > > >> > > > Sysfs is one value per file, you have three values here, please >make 3 >> > > > files. >> > > > >> > > > And document them in Documentation/ABI/. >> > > >> > > Hmm, sure Greg, I'll update. Thanks! >> > >> > Something like below I suppose? Look, if there will be no complains >> > on tech aspects on the patch (locking and tty refs) -- I'll update >> > Documentation. Just want be sure I've made no mistakes here. >> > >> > Another question -- would not it be worth to wrap code with >> > CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE? >> >> Alan's point stands, what's the use of this if it can instantly >change >> after you read the value? > >We use it when we do a checkpoint, ie when tasks are stopped. I think >it's >close to data obtained from procfs (ie valid once you read it but can >be >changed right after that operation). Maybe I should put everything to >procfs, or stick back with ioctl calls? The problem as I see it is that you don't know if your process is the lock holder. -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
