Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 09/11] check files for checkpointability
From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
       "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090309173837.GC7561@us.ibm.com>
References: <20090309173837.GC7561@us.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:14:29 -0700
Message-Id: <1236885269.30142.106.camel@nimitz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1150
Lines: 33

On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 10:38 -0700, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 08:39:10AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > +static void __scan_files_for_cr(struct files_struct *files)
> > +{
> > +	int i;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < files->fdtab.max_fds; i++) {
> > +		struct file *f = fcheck_files(files, i);
> > +		if (!f)
> > +			continue;
> > +		if (cr_file_supported(f))
> > +			continue;
> > +		files_deny_checkpointing(files);
> 
> At this point couldn't we skip the rest of the loop iterations?

As it stands, yeah.  That makes sense.

> Might it also be useful to print a path to f here? So not only would
> the log show the location in the kernel source but we'd also get some
> idea of which file caused the problem? Of course "f" isn't always
> available everywhere we call files_deny_checkpointing()..

Also a good suggestion.  That would help the readability of the warning
a bunch.

-- Dave

--
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/