Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:44:16 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpumask 5/10 rewrite cpumask.h - single bitmap based implementation |
| |
> Three things are required.
Thank-you, Rusty. That makes more sense. The first step in designing good API's is to be clear what information it is essential to pass.
> In this case, though, the early example programs for setaffinity all > used "unsigned long mask; sys_sched_setaffinity(...&mask, > sizeof(mask))", which was both simple and wrong.
Yeah ... several layers of suckage are in the kernel bitmap layout, kernel/user API for passing bitmaps, and low level glibc sched set and get affinity API. You identify another one. Not felony (major) suckage, just petty (minor). Annoying none the less. And the source of quite a few hours of "software maintenance" work. This margin is too small to contain the details ;).
Oh well ... I've done my stint for now (hopeful past tense, again) trying to leave things a little neater than when I arrived.
I hope to turn now back to the cpuset work that I've been assisting Simon Derr (Bull) on.
Thanks, Rusty, William, Matthew, Nick and others.
-- 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/
| |