From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com,
seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cpuset: fix wrong calculation of relax domain level
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:15:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080728001530.bf7f5e44.pj@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <488D3331.8000306@cn.fujitsu.com>
Seems ok to me:
Reviewed-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Li Zefan wrote:
> - update_domain_attr(dattr, &top_cpuset);
> + update_domain_attr_tree(dattr, &top_cpuset);
Does this change mean that there is now only -one- place that calls
"update_domain_attr()", that being "update_domain_attr_tree()" ?
If so, then perhaps:
1) "update_domain_attr()" could be removed as a separate routine,
with its code folded into "update_domain_attr_tree()".
2) a proper opening comment could be provided "update_domain_attr()",
stating what it does, and its locking needs.
The above, if it makes sense, would be an additional PATCH, on top
of your present patches, further refining them.
Separate topic ...
It bothers me a little that there is a generic 'attributes' and related
*_attr() and dattr variable names, all speaking of some set of multiple
generic attributes, such as in:
struct sched_domain_attr *dattr; /* attributes for custom domains */
even though, when all is said and done, there is only one attribute,
the relax_domain_level. The generic, content-free word 'attributes'
just obfuscates the single specific value, relax_domain_level, being
managed here.
... However, I'm too lazy to propose a patch to mess with this.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-28 5:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-28 2:47 [PATCH 3/3] cpuset: fix wrong calculation of relax domain level Li Zefan
2008-07-28 5:15 ` Paul Jackson [this message]
2008-07-29 2:16 ` Li Zefan
2008-07-29 13:05 ` Paul Jackson
2008-07-29 13:11 ` Paul Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080728001530.bf7f5e44.pj@sgi.com \
--to=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox