[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]
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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.214 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site