From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756117Ab2KHOkA (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:40:00 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:63936 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755680Ab2KHOj5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:39:57 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 06:39:52 -0800 From: Tejun Heo To: Michal Hocko Cc: lizefan@huawei.com, rjw@sisk.pl, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] cgroup_freezer: make freezer->state mask of flags Message-ID: <20121108143952.GD12973@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1351931915-1701-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1351931915-1701-7-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20121108103928.GD31821@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121108103928.GD31821@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Michal. On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:39:28AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Sat 03-11-12 01:38:32, Tejun Heo wrote: > > freezer->state was an enum value - one of THAWED, FREEZING and FROZEN. > > As the scheduled full hierarchy support requires more than one > > freezing condition, switch it to mask of flags. If FREEZING is not > > set, it's thawed. FREEZING is set if freezing or frozen. If frozen, > > both FREEZING and FROZEN are set. Now that tasks can be attached to > > an already frozen cgroup, this also makes freezing condition checks > > more natural. > > > > This patch doesn't introduce any behavior change. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > > I think it would be nicer to use freezer_state_flags enum rather than > unsigned int for the state. I would even expect gcc to complain about > that but it looks like -fstrict-enums is c++ specific (so long enum > safety). But if you use it as flag bits, the resulting value no longer is inside the defined enum values. Isn't that weird? Thanks. -- tejun