From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] cgroup: Remove CGROUP_BUILTIN_SUBSYS_COUNT Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 15:23:54 -0700 Message-ID: <20120906222354.GQ29092@google.com> References: <1345816904-21745-1-git-send-email-wagi@monom.org> <1345816904-21745-6-git-send-email-wagi@monom.org> <20120824232840.GS21325@google.com> <5039046D.1040402@monom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Wj1QD+QoT7J4hGvJFkzZ0Sa1Rdzwl7TWIxcXg84Mhok=; b=tOUtniwTkf5BkromT2CRPwGvV9ltN/nzDrw6FEnLUG0jJsRzTc9pgAffbuObCLKcJA WHsxnHFZsGhPNZWy8Zc8nEHzbItmsdq4fr/FHUlr6xC7K3gck67X7v5l8Uypi1sAyZyA d3Y9fl5HlzephaEtr5a2teZzDPa9Cogjk3/7js/VNcucUTJGSHhU37S8QSk0OT2nGgvQ 9GVnxq96a6b0uFPh9JPvR81C4ovmlOo9kVPqK0vofiY5P1H+WwkukBBuHoHKIATkUoQC pTwv2J+timHSH7yHy49JVPmVQ3z+4XM5LZDDvvsE6nc06/JJPMG4ZplkiFh7MU8S42t1 En9Q== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5039046D.1040402-kQCPcA+X3s7YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Daniel Wagner Cc: netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Li Zefan , "David S. Miller" Hello, Daniel. On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 06:59:25PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote: > >Wouldn't it be better to explicitly state that a following patch would > >reduce the SUBSYS_COUNT and stop putting builtin and module ones into > >different sections? > > Sure, can do that. I just to make sure I understand you correctly, > What do you mean with different section? Do you refer to the enum sorting? I meant that there's no reason to have all builtin ones contiguosly and then the module ones using two cgroup_subsys.h inclusions. Thanks! -- tejun