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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/1/07, Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 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 [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]
  Powered by Linux