From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Li Zefan Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlb_cgroup: explicitly init the early_init field Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 15:14:33 +0800 Message-ID: <535616D9.8060702@huawei.com> References: <1398144620-9630-1-git-send-email-nasa4836@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Jianyu Zhan Cc: containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, LKML , Linux-MM , Hillf Danton , Tejun Heo , Cgroups On 2014/4/22 15:01, Jianyu Zhan wrote: > Hi, hillf, > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Hillf Danton wrote: >> But other fields still missed, if any. Fair? > > yep, it is not fair. > > Sure for this global variable struct, if not initailized, its all > fields will be initialized > to 0 or null(depending on its type). The point here is no to deprive > the rights of > compiler/linker of doing this initialization, it is mainly for > documentation reason. > Actually this field's value would affect how ->css_alloc should implemented. > > Concretely, if early_init is nonzero, then ->css_alloc *must not* call kzalloc, > because in cgroup implementation, ->css_alloc will be called earlier before > mm_init(). > > I don't think that the value of one field(early_init) has a so subtle > restrition on the > another field(css_alloc) is a good thing, but since it is there, > docment it should > be needed. > I don't see how things can be improved by initializing it to 0 explicitly, if anything needs to be improved.