Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: procfs bloat, syscall bloat [in reference to cpu affinity] | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 27 Nov 2001 15:56:22 -0500 |
| |
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/
|  |