From: Andreas Ferber <aferber@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] syscall interface for cpu affinity
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 01:38:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020311013853.A1545@devcon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1015784104.1261.8.camel@phantasy>
In-Reply-To: <1015784104.1261.8.camel@phantasy>; from rml@tech9.net on Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 01:15:03PM -0500
On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 01:15:03PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
>
> This patch implements
>
> int sched_set_affinity(pid_t pid, unsigned int len,
> unsigned long *new_mask_ptr);
>
> int sched_get_affinity(pid_t pid, unsigned int *user_len_ptr,
> unsigned long *user_mask_ptr)
>
> which set and get the cpu affinity (task->cpus_allowed) for a task,
> using the set_cpus_allowed function in Ingo's scheduler. The functions
> properly support changes to cpus_allowed, implement security, and are
> well-tested.
Setting the affinity of a whole process group also makes sense IMHO.
Therefore I think an interface more like the setpriority syscall
for sched_set_affinity (with two parameters which/who instead of a
single PID) would be more flexible, eg.
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.
Getting the mask of a group of processes doesn't make sense though
(what if they differ?), so the current interface of sched_get_affinity
is just fine IMHO.
Andreas
--
Andreas Ferber - dev/consulting GmbH - Bielefeld, FRG
---------------------------------------------------------
+49 521 1365800 - af@devcon.net - www.devcon.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-11 0:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-10 18:15 [PATCH] syscall interface for cpu affinity Robert Love
2002-03-10 20:29 ` Andreas Jaeger
2002-03-10 20:53 ` Robert Love
2002-03-10 21:03 ` Andreas Jaeger
2002-03-10 22:23 ` Andreas Schwab
2002-03-10 23:56 ` Andreas Ferber
2002-03-10 23:45 ` Jeff Garzik
1976-03-03 15:58 ` Tim Hockin
2002-03-11 0:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-11 0:32 ` Tim Hockin
2002-03-10 22:05 ` Chris Wedgwood
2002-03-10 22:11 ` Robert Love
2002-03-11 0:38 ` Andreas Ferber [this message]
2002-03-15 22:06 ` Stephen Samuel
2002-03-16 0:43 ` Andreas Ferber
2002-03-16 4:24 ` Stephen Samuel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020311013853.A1545@devcon.net \
--to=aferber@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.