On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Jackson wrote: > > > Forcing coders to specify the same detail in multiple places, when > > > there is no way to validate their consistency, doesn't force them > > > to think or do it right. It increases the error rate due to > > > > There are always wrappers for system calls. The flags will be set in > > these. > > We were discussing libnuma here, not glibc. The system call wrappers > are in glibc. System call wrappers should not be setting optional > flags. They should just make the system call -- do whatever magic it > takes to get the provided arguments into the right registers or other > conventionally determined places, and invoke the necessary machine > instruction to trap into the kernel. The library interface can set flags to modify behavior. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- References:
- [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] x86: show cpuinfo only for online CPUs
- Next by Date: Re: [Devel] Re: [PATCH resend] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- Index(es):