[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <36ca99e90804101036o407dda7dyc303bd87f46c5cfc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:36:12 +0200
From: "Bert Wesarg" <bert.wesarg@...glemail.com>
To: "Greg KH" <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc: "Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>, travis@....com, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86: add cpus_scnprintf function v3
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 06:14:55PM +0200, Bert Wesarg wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Paul Jackson <pj@....com> wrote:
> > > Bert wrote:
> > > > Btw, I think you can now push for a deprecation of the 'old' mask
> > > > attributes, with the justification you have given above. The other
> > > > possibility is to change sysfs to provide bigger attribute buffers
> > > > (CCed Greg for this).
> > >
> > > On the other hand, and my main point of this message, I can't
> > > see deprecating the mask format files on account of this sort
> > > of analysis.
> > >
> > My statement from above doesn't reflect my opinion. I'm still in
> > flavor with the mask output. And from this discussion, I found a new
> > point for the mask output: its bounded ;-)
> >
> > I just wanted to note, that these new list attributes would be the
> > only way to 'change' the api, ie. introduce a new api and deprecate
> > the old one, and not change the format of the present api.
> >
> > Unfortunately, to support the mask attributes beyond 4k cpus, sysfs
> > has to support greater attribute buffers.
>
> Well, it does already today, you just have to work at it :)
>
> What we can do for these types of files, is to use the "binary
> attribute" file format. With that, you get full control over the buffer
> size and other operations.
>
> So someone should just wrap up the cpu mask sysfs file usage in a
> function that uses the binary attribute instead. Then everyone who uses
> the cpu mask in a sysfs file can use that function instead.
>
> Sound reasonable?
Very. Thanks.
Bert
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
--
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