[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060807023025.2c44f3d1.pj@sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 02:30:25 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To: Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>
Cc: nagar@...son.ibm.com, akpm@...l.org, vatsa@...ibm.com,
mingo@...e.hu, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, sam@...ain.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvz.org, efault@....de,
balbir@...ibm.com, sekharan@...ibm.com, haveblue@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [ProbableSpam] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource
Management - A cpu controller
Kirill wrote:
> > A filesystem based interface is useful when you have hierarchies (as resource
> > groups and cpusets do) since it naturally defines a convenient to use
> > hierarchical namespace.
> but it is not much convinient for applications then.
Is this simply a language issue? File systems hierarchies
are more easily manipulated with shell utilities (ls, cat,
find, grep, ...) and system call API's are easier to access
from C?
If so, then perhaps all that's lacking for convenient C access
to a filesystem based interface is a good library, that presents
an API convenient for use from C code, but underneath makes the
necessary file system calls (open, read, diropen, stat, ...).
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists