Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers

On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:23:52PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Umm, no - please naje two versions with and without the lock.

Ok this patch may not be necessary (given Paul's observation that
read_lock will suffice in update_nodemask).

> Also Please fix up the codingstyle, the { belongs onto a line of it's own.

Paul, I suspect that there are a number of Codingstyle related changes you
may need to address in your next version (including the one pointed by 
Christoph) 


-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers
    • From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21 and pseudo-authorities
• Next by Date: Re: Linux 2.6.21
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers
• Next by thread: [patch 00/10] mount ownership and unprivileged mount syscall (v5)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]