Re: [patch] cpusets: allow empty {cpus,mems}_allowed to be set for unpopulated cpuset

[Paul Menage]

On 5/1/07, Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Why do you need this?  It adds a little more code, and changes
> semantics a little bit, so I'd think it should have at least a
> little bit of justfication.

We have cases where we'd like to be able to clear the memory nodes
away from a (temporarily) empty cpuset without actually deleting the
directory - there's really no reason for the interface to stop people
from doing that as far as I can see. Otherwise the only way to reclaim
the node for a different sibling is to delete the cpuset.

> +       if (!*buf) {
> +               cpus_clear(trialcs.cpus_allowed);
>
> Won't the above code fail if someone does:
>
>         echo > /dev/cpuset/foobar/mems
>
> Just guessing, but I'd expect buf[] to contain a newline char,
> not just a zero length string, at this point.

Yes, but that's arguably an artefact of the user using the wrong tool
to update the cpu/node set. Doing "echo -n > /dev/cpuset/foobar/mems"
has the expected effect.

Paul
-
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/