lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: procfs bloat, syscall bloat [in reference to cpu affinity]
From
Date
On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 06:32, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> > I am not against a proc interface per se, I would like a proc
> > interface, especially for the reading of affinity values. But in my
> > view the system call interface should also exist and it should be the
> > dominate way of communicating affinity to processes.
>
> i'm not against the /proc interface either - on the contrary, i've picked
> it when implementing /proc/irq/<NR>/smp_affinity.

What if we kept the procfs interface for read only and keep both
syscalls for read and write ?

The proc read interface is 2 lines of code in one function ... very much
of my patch would be gone. Again, personally, I'd like to see proc for
writing and reading, but ...

Robert Love

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.055 / U:1.956 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site