From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: sched_setaffinity usability
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:06:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040318210632.GA11529@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0403181248440.4976@dlang.diginsite.com>
* David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com> wrote:
> Doesn't /proc/config.gz answer this question?
no. /proc as an interface has the same disadvantages as the /etc
approach.
(there was talk about something like /proc/vdso.so - but in this special
case the kernel is much better at mapping the vdso pages: why spend
three syscalls and a pagefault on something that can be done zero-cost.)
99.9% of userspace code is modularized around the concept of ELF DSOs.
They are well-understood and have a history of providing good control of
backwards and forwards compatibility. They are flexible and they dont
really have any baggage that affects performance. A DSO is the ideal
interface to attach the kernel to glibc. Code and constant data can
reside in this DSO just fine. (even non-constant data can reside in the
DSO.) I'd really not want to reinvent the wheel and put yet another
concept of a dynamic shared object into the kernel (and make that
per-platform too).
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-18 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-18 8:05 sched_setaffinity usability Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-18 8:12 ` Tim Hockin
2004-03-18 8:22 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-18 8:47 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-18 9:45 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-18 10:10 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-18 11:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-18 12:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-03-18 12:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-19 8:05 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-18 15:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-03-18 18:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-18 18:33 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-18 18:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-18 18:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-18 20:01 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-18 20:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-18 20:49 ` David Lang
2004-03-18 20:57 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-03-18 21:06 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2004-03-18 21:07 ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-18 21:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-19 1:37 ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-19 9:02 ` Helge Hafting
2004-03-21 9:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-03-19 0:00 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-18 17:47 ` sched_setaffinity usability -- other issue Chris Friesen
[not found] <1B0Ls-lY-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1B42z-3Lx-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1B4Fh-4sQ-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1B86P-8gq-69@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1Bars-2s6-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1BaKU-2Lg-49@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1BaKX-2Lg-61@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1BaUR-2V0-41@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-03-18 21:23 ` sched_setaffinity usability Andi Kleen
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=20040318210632.GA11529@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=david.lang@digitalinsight.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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.