2011-03-04 15:46:45

by Dave Young

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 02/04 v2] sysctl: change to use proc_dointvec_bool while needed

change only 0 and 1 valid sysctl case to use proc_do_intvec_bool handler

Signed-off-by: Dave Young <[email protected]>
---
kernel/sysctl.c | 32 ++++++++------------------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sysctl.c 2011-03-04 23:05:29.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sysctl.c 2011-03-04 23:16:34.083637541 +0800
@@ -342,9 +342,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &sysctl_timer_migration,
.maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
#endif
{
@@ -374,9 +372,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled,
.maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
@@ -704,9 +700,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &dmesg_restrict,
.maxlen = sizeof(int),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
{
.procname = "kptr_restrict",
@@ -747,9 +741,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &softlockup_panic,
.maxlen = sizeof(int),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
{
.procname = "nmi_watchdog",
@@ -861,9 +853,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &sysctl_hung_task_panic,
.maxlen = sizeof(int),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
{
.procname = "hung_task_check_count",
@@ -1297,9 +1287,7 @@ static struct ctl_table vm_table[] = {
.data = &vm_highmem_is_dirtyable,
.maxlen = sizeof(vm_highmem_is_dirtyable),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
#endif
{
@@ -1315,18 +1303,14 @@ static struct ctl_table vm_table[] = {
.data = &sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill,
.maxlen = sizeof(sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
{
.procname = "memory_failure_recovery",
.data = &sysctl_memory_failure_recovery,
.maxlen = sizeof(sysctl_memory_failure_recovery),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
- .extra1 = &zero,
- .extra2 = &one,
+ .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
},
#endif
{ }


2011-03-07 23:05:47

by Andrew Morton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/04 v2] sysctl: change to use proc_dointvec_bool while needed

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 23:46:31 +0800
Dave Young <[email protected]> wrote:

> @@ -374,9 +372,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
> .data = &sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled,
> .maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
> .mode = 0644,
> - .proc_handler = proc_dointvec,
> - .extra1 = &zero,
> - .extra2 = &one,
> + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_bool,
> },

This field has changed in linux-next, so I dropped this hunk.

2011-03-08 05:15:56

by Dave Young

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/04 v2] sysctl: change to use proc_dointvec_bool while needed

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 23:46:31 +0800
> Dave Young <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> @@ -374,9 +372,7 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
>>               .data           = &sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled,
>>               .maxlen         = sizeof(unsigned int),
>>               .mode           = 0644,
>> -             .proc_handler   = proc_dointvec,
>> -             .extra1         = &zero,
>> -             .extra2         = &one,
>> +             .proc_handler   = proc_dointvec_bool,
>>       },
>
> This field has changed in linux-next, so I dropped this hunk.
>

Thank you for updating the patch.

--
Regards
dave
????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?