[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <461290ED.2030303@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 10:37:49 -0700
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
To: "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" <linux-os@...logic.com>
CC: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: getting processor numbers
linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
> Shouldn't it just be another system call? 223 is currently unused. You
> could fill that up with __NR_nr_cpus. The value already exists in
> the kernel.
You forget about Linus' credo "there shall be no sysconf-like syscall".
I'd be all for sys_sysconf or even the limited sys_nr_cpus although
ideally then we'd have two syscalls (probed CPUs, active CPUs, in which
case sys_sysconf is the better choice).
--
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (252 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists