Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932822AbXALIKw (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:10:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932825AbXALIKw (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:10:52 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:54186 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932822AbXALIKw (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:10:52 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=U8Cp9fMu5ECKwXEohLUpSvJgDs7lxVpujFSxJlcpvRThLEewRGauFHJgMymYErjpp mZwKgOEJUPp6+vGvGBbIg== Message-ID: <6599ad830701120010u11f24bfdxeb3e8bfbd8bdba40@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:10:32 -0800 From: "Paul Menage" To: balbir@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 3/6] containers: Add generic multi-subsystem API to containers Cc: vatsa@in.ibm.com, sekharan@us.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru, dev@sw.ru, containers@lists.osdl.org, pj@sgi.com, mbligh@google.com, winget@google.com, rohitseth@google.com, serue@us.ibm.com, devel@openvz.org In-Reply-To: <45A72AE0.9010209@in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20061222141442.753211763@menage.corp.google.com> <20061222145216.574346828@menage.corp.google.com> <45A50CA5.6070101@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830701111453t62bec38cl9534263002f48a15@mail.gmail.com> <45A72AE0.9010209@in.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 848 Lines: 26 On 1/11/07, Balbir Singh wrote: > to 0. To walk the hierarchy, I have no root now since I do not have > any task context. I was wondering if exporting the rootnode or providing > a function to export the rootnode of the mounter hierarchy will make > programming easier. Ah - I misunderstood what you were looking for before. > > Something like > > struct container *get_root_container(struct container_subsys *ss) > { > return &rootnode[ss->hierarchy]; > } Yes, something like that sounds fine - except that it would be return &rootnode[ss->hierarchy].top_container; Paul - 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/