On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:05:12 +0530 Dhaval Giani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 12:00:33PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:34:15 +0530 Dhaval Giani wrote: > > > > > > > > > +config RESOURCE_COUNTERS > > > + bool "Resource counters" > > > + help > > > + This option enables controller independent resource accounting > > > > Above line is tab + 2 spaces (i.e., correct). > > > > > + infrastructure that works with cgroups. > > > > Above line indent is 10 spaces (i.e., not correct). > > > > Ah! Thanks for the explanation. Corrected patch follows. > > Signed-off-by : Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Signed-off-by : Dhaval Giani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ... > > @@ -219,6 +225,9 @@ static inline struct task_grp *task_grp( > > #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED > tg = p->user->tg; > +#elif CONFIG_FAIR_CGROUP_SCHED > + tg = container_of(task_subsys_state(p, cpu_cgroup_subsys_id), > + struct task_grp, css); > #else > tg = &init_task_grp; > #endif that's a bit funny-looking. Are CONFIG_FAIR_CGROUP_SCHED and CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED mutually exclusive? Doesn't seem that way. if they're both defined then CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED "wins". Anyway, please confirm that this is correct? I'll switch that to `#elif defined(CONFIG_FAIR_CGROUP_SCHED)'. We can get gcc warnings with `#if CONFIG_FOO', and people should be using `#ifdef CONFIG_FOO', so I assume the same applies to #elif. - 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/
