lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
From
Date
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 10:26 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Christoph wrote:
> > The library interface can set flags to modify behavior.
>
> A library such as libnuma can set them, yes, but not everyone uses
> libnuma. Basically everyone uses the standard C library, glibc, which
> has the system call wrappers, but these wrappers should not be setting
> optional flags.
>
> We're going around in circles here, Christoph.

I think that the syscall man pages can document the behavior mode flag
for folks who want to use the "raw" interface. I think we already
recommend the use of libnuma APIs. [If not we can make it so, if folks
agree.]

So, we default to old behavior in the raw syscall APIs--we MUST, right?
"no breaky user APIs..."--and let new version of the library/ies enable
new behavior when appropriate. Even a "new syscall", such as the
set_mempolicy2(), et al that you suggested, could be just wrappers over
the existing ones with the behavior mod flag. Or vice versa.

Lee



-
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: 2007-11-01 18:41    [W:0.057 / U:0.756 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site