Re: [PATCH] syscall interface for cpu affinity

From: Andreas Ferber (aferber@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de)
Date: Fri Mar 15 2002 - 19:43:26 EST

Next message: Rusty Russell: "bit ops on unsigned long?"
Previous message: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: 2.4.18 Preempt Freezeups"
In reply to: Stephen Samuel: "Re: [PATCH] syscall interface for cpu affinity"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 02:06:04PM -0800, Stephen Samuel wrote:
> >
> > int sched_set_affinity(int which, int who, unsigned int len,
> > unsigned long *new_mask_ptr);
> >
> > with who one of {PRIO_PROCESS,PRIO_PGRP,PRIO_USER} and which according
> > to the value of who.

Uh, who/which should be just the other way round in the description
(but not in the prototype). Sorry.

> I soule suggest that the order be
>
> int sched_set_affinity(int who, int which, unsigned int len,
> unsigned long *new_mask_ptr);
>
> This would have the {p,pg}id be the first thing that a programmer
> would see (likely more important than the 'which'.).

See my correction above, does that address your concern?

Andreas

-- 
       Andreas Ferber - dev/consulting GmbH - Bielefeld, FRG
     ---------------------------------------------------------
         +49 521 1365800 - af@devcon.net - www.devcon.net
-
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/

Next message: Rusty Russell: "bit ops on unsigned long?"
Previous message: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: 2.4.18 Preempt Freezeups"
In reply to: Stephen Samuel: "Re: [PATCH] syscall interface for cpu affinity"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 15 2002 - 22:00:22 EST