lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Here's an initial proposal for abstracting cpumask_t to be either
>
> At least for some cases I don't think you'll get around defining
> a "nearby subset of CPUs that can be handled together" type. Handling 1K
> objects all the time in one piece is simply not a good idea.
>
> -Andi


Every time I stop to think about this, the problems with the cpu
operators come to mind. Should there be a separate set? Or simply
conversion functions to/from a "cpumask_subset" type?

Thanks,
Mike


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-11 01:35    [W:0.117 / U:0.632 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site