Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:41:10 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] rework mem_cgroup iterator
Message-ID: <20121114184110.GD21185@mtj.dyndns.org>
References: <1352820639-13521-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
 <50A3C42F.9020901@parallels.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50A3C42F.9020901@parallels.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 889
Lines: 22

Hello, Glauber.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 05:17:51PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
> Why can't we reuse the scheduler iterator and move it to kernel/cgroup.c
> ? It already exists, provide sane ordering, and only relies on parent
> information - which cgroup core already have - to do the walk.

Hmmm... we can but I personally much prefer for_each_*() iterators
over callback based ones.  It's just much easier to share states
across an iteration and follow the logic.  walk_tg_tree_from() does
have the benefit of being able to combine pre and post visits in the
same walk, which doesn't seem to have any user at the moment.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/