From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Li Zefan Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cgroup: consolidate cgroup_attach_task() and cgroup_attach_proc() Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:43:29 +0800 Message-ID: <513FD9C1.4020604@huawei.com> References: <513FD395.7000906@huawei.com> <20130313011939.GC2999@htj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130313011939.GC2999-Gd/HAXX7CRxy/B6EtB590w@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Tejun Heo Cc: LKML , Cgroups On 2013/3/13 9:19, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 09:17:09AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: >> These two functions share most of the code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan >> --- >> >> v2: Not necessary to move cgroup_attach_task_all(). > > I supposed this one is the one to apply? > yep. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755857Ab3CMBnl (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:43:41 -0400 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.64]:1045 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755285Ab3CMBnj (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:43:39 -0400 Message-ID: <513FD9C1.4020604@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:43:29 +0800 From: Li Zefan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: LKML , Cgroups Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cgroup: consolidate cgroup_attach_task() and cgroup_attach_proc() References: <513FD395.7000906@huawei.com> <20130313011939.GC2999@htj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20130313011939.GC2999@htj.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.135.68.215] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2013/3/13 9:19, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 09:17:09AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: >> These two functions share most of the code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan >> --- >> >> v2: Not necessary to move cgroup_attach_task_all(). > > I supposed this one is the one to apply? > yep.