Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] per-cgroup tcp buffers control

Glauber Costa
2011-09-18T19:43:19Z

On 09/18/2011 03:58 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:33:58PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:11:32PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:46:12PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>> +int tcp_init_cgroup_fill(struct proto *prot, struct cgroup *cgrp,
>>>> + struct cgroup_subsys *ss)
>>>> +{
>>>> + prot->enter_memory_pressure = tcp_enter_memory_pressure;
>>>> + prot->memory_allocated = memory_allocated_tcp;
>>>> + prot->prot_mem = tcp_sysctl_mem;
>>>> + prot->sockets_allocated = sockets_allocated_tcp;
>>>> + prot->memory_pressure = memory_pressure_tcp;
>>>
>>> No fancy formatting, please.
>>>
>>
>> What's wrong with having fancy formatting? It's indeed easier to read
>> when members are assigned this way. It's always up to maintainer to
>> choose what he prefers, but I see nothing wrong in such style (if only it
>> doesn't break the style of the whole file).
>
> You have to remove this indenting if you'll reorganize code (e.g. move
> part under if(...)).
> IMO, it reduces code maintainability.
>
As I said, I don't care, so I'll change. But I have to say I disagree
with your statement.

It is a pack of assignments, so if you reorganize this code, two things
can happen:
1) It is not moved to a new ident level -> It keeps being a pack of
assignments, and you don't really need to change it.
2) It is moved to a new ident level -> You have to touch it anyway...