Paul M wrote:
> It basically makes "cpuset" an alias for "container"
> in the relevant /proc directories if CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API is
> defined.
Paul M - I never replied to your initial CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API
patch proposal - sorry.
An aspect of this proposal never made sense to me, so I put it aside
and went on to other things.
It is important to me that the current cpuset API be maintained. The
cpuset API seems to be working well, for a number of users.
Occassionally I will agree to subtle API changes (see another thread
concerning cpu_exclusive and sched_domain cpuset flags), but not
anything likely to break user code outright, except under duress.
But I presume this CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API option means I either
get to build a kernel that supports the new container API, or a kernel
that supports the old cpuset API. That does not seem useful to me.
We need to support both API's, at runtime, at the same time. Not a choice
of API's at build time with a kernel CONFIG option.
Perhaps I am missing something ...
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
