Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:06:32 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: sched_setaffinity usability |
| |
* David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com> wrote:
> Doesn't /proc/config.gz answer this question?
no. /proc as an interface has the same disadvantages as the /etc approach.
(there was talk about something like /proc/vdso.so - but in this special case the kernel is much better at mapping the vdso pages: why spend three syscalls and a pagefault on something that can be done zero-cost.)
99.9% of userspace code is modularized around the concept of ELF DSOs. They are well-understood and have a history of providing good control of backwards and forwards compatibility. They are flexible and they dont really have any baggage that affects performance. A DSO is the ideal interface to attach the kernel to glibc. Code and constant data can reside in this DSO just fine. (even non-constant data can reside in the DSO.) I'd really not want to reinvent the wheel and put yet another concept of a dynamic shared object into the kernel (and make that per-platform too).
Ingo - 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/
| |