From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] device_cgroup: do not use rule acceptance function to validate access Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:07:43 -0400 Message-ID: <20140414190743.GA16835@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20140414144736.GS29214@redhat.com> <20140414180323.GC15249@htj.dyndns.org> <20140414181611.GU29214@redhat.com> 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=S1vEyg+Jk0WCLoP/1rEbYfmROqpVzp3gqHUD98CYhVo=; b=P9/STWPp5a8GC/tmKWxCstWRYMEI+TFke2sgV32pRm0A6O8Kn5uYhkYEtOiVjvvaD0 ttHV2i42Lv96Uw0v1N8IeIIC8RQ2lflHTRyTxd34udy8gPILk+TmPDwLFM5v6uWqnr/L nrifky7l03RyrROO8yIBluFYbslV3MJopebkqM9OkbYFetAodhfy84xWhfFcvtRylMvI DYdl3NQNednFHqtasgf5rCIYMEUNSM1hYGFbET1G+GAeu42pnD7DKpwOyOLowEmKmH5Q Wa8gKgn/ERjFwBaLQ2vAjrmOU1yWyeXFEXYFQfu6qDBhgBbZ8B/EODQBQzEfLcGOd9v3 h9mg== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140414181611.GU29214-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Aristeu Rozanski Cc: cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Li Zefan , Serge Hallyn Hey, On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 02:16:12PM -0400, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > Currently, there's a lot of duplication in rather > > delicate code and it's not clear where they differ and why. > > Are you referring to the duplication in this patch or other areas too? In this patch but if you can reduce duplications in reasonable way in other areas, that'd also be great. :) Thanks! -- tejun