Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:17:49 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix argument checking in sched_setaffinity |
| |
> Take a toke, man.
Ahh ... much better ... thanks.
> Well, that's so much slower and not any more obvious than just doing the > iterative few system calls that I don't really see the point other than
Perhaps no more obvious to you, but if you had to see the confusion I'm seeing over on user side, this /proc/sys/kernel/sizeof_cpumask might be a win.
But if you want to take the position that it's not the kernels job to keep the users head screwed on straight, I won't argue.
Besides, when you wrote "I don't know how to sanely expose the damn things", I instinctively took that as a challenge to present a way.
==
I still like the position I thought you took for a moment there, of tightening, not loosening, the preconditions on setaffinity, starting with backing out the changes made to it this week.
Are you still thinking of doing that, or would you rather just let this dog go back to sleep, as it lies now?
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373 - 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/
| |