Re: [PATCH] cpumask 5/10 rewrite cpumask.h - single bitmap basedimplementation

[Rusty Russell]

On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 04:12, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> /* William Lee Irwin III:
> >> I'm thoroughly disgusted.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:47:56AM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > Yup ... LOL.  One sick piece of code.

We've been here before.  I argued the userspace interface was broken to
require this looping, Linus said it was fine, Ingo said "userspace will
assume < 1024 cpus" and if we get more than that we'll need a new
interface, and that's what glibc does today with its cpu_set_t.

Shades of select-style pain, but it's not likely to change in the near
future.

Note also that saying "Schedule me on CPU 1 and 999" 'succeeds' at the
moment.

Yes, NR_CPUS needs to get to userspace somehow sanely if we want to fix
this in general.

Rusty.
-- 
Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/