Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:40:25 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpumask 5/10 rewrite cpumask.h - single bitmap based implementation |
| |
William Lee Irwin III wrote: > or whatever someone can be arsed to consider a better idea.
If anyone lurking feels the urge to drive this puppy home, jump in.
I'm unavailable, and from what I can guess reading between William's lines, he's not signed up either. Be forewarned - it's an area that can generate some long lkml threads ;). Both William and I seem to have an ample supply of keystrokes.
> a user ABI change in a stable series, would be unfriendly
I agree. While I contemplated such, I don't recall advocating such, for the reason you state. We're stuck at least for now with the sched_(set/get)affinity ABI.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373 - 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/
| |