Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 May 2003 02:14:31 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: userspace irq balancer |
| |
On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 10:03:50PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: >> Does anyone have a patch to tear it out already? Is the current proc >> interface acceptable, or do we want a syscall interface like wli >> suggests?
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 09:00:18AM +0000, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > I have no problems with the proc interface; it's ascii so reasonably > extendible in the future for, say, when 64 cpus on > 32 bit linux get supported. It's also not THAT inefficient since my code > only uses it when some binding changes, not all the time.
Sorry about that; I forgot about the /proc/ part and thought the thing was based on system calls as it stood. I wouldn't want a redundant interface to be added.
My current cpumask_t patches handle extending the /proc/ interface to handle an arbitrary-sized cpumask, so I should have realized this.
-- wli - 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/
| |