On 12/14/2011 06:29 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:37PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
bool field just to indicate if the clone_children flag is set.
Make it a flag
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa
Doe
22:45, Glauber Costa wrote:
> Those are quite simple bit-testing functions that are
> only used within this file. Not reason for them not to
> be inline.
>
It's better to leave the optimization decision to gcc.
And I've confirmed they are inlined by gcc in my box.
(btw, please add "cgroup" pref
Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:37PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
>> bool field just to indicate if the clone_children flag is set.
>> Make it a flag
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa
>
> Doesn't this change how rem
于 2011年12月13日 23:41, Tejun Heo 写道:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:38PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
>> bool field just to indicate if 'none' subsystem were explicitly
>> requested.
>>
>> Make it a flag
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Cos
On 12/13/2011 05:59 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
Le mardi 13 décembre 2011 à 14:49 +0100, Christoph Paasch a écrit :
now there are plenty of compiler-warnings when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
In file included from include/linux/tcp.h:211:0,
from include/linux/ipv6.h:221,
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:59:08 +0100
> [PATCH net-next] net: fix build error if CONFIG_CGROUPS=n
>
> Reported-by: Christoph Paasch
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet
Applied, thanks.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://op
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:38PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
> There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
> bool field just to indicate if 'none' subsystem were explicitly
> requested.
>
> Make it a flag
>
> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa
Same as the previous patch. Doesn't
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:37PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
> There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
> bool field just to indicate if the clone_children flag is set.
> Make it a flag
>
> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa
Doesn't this change how remount conditions are checked
Le mardi 13 décembre 2011 à 14:49 +0100, Christoph Paasch a écrit :
> now there are plenty of compiler-warnings when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
>
> In file included from include/linux/tcp.h:211:0,
> from include/linux/ipv6.h:221,
> from include/net/ip_vs.h:23,
>
On 12/13/2011 02:03 PM, Kinsbursky Stanislav wrote:
13.12.2011 13:13, Glauber Costa пишет:
On 12/13/2011 01:02 PM, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
13.12.2011 02:52, Andrew Morton пишет:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:50:00 +0300
Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
This routine is required for SUNRPC sysctl's, w
On 12/13/2011 01:02 PM, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
13.12.2011 02:52, Andrew Morton пишет:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:50:00 +0300
Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
This routine is required for SUNRPC sysctl's, which are going to be
allocated,
processed and destroyed per network namespace context.
IOW, n
13.12.2011 02:52, Andrew Morton пишет:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:50:00 +0300
Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
This routine is required for SUNRPC sysctl's, which are going to be allocated,
processed and destroyed per network namespace context.
IOW, new sysctl root will be registered on network namespa
12 matches
Mail list logo
