Date: 4 Sep 2004 15:40:20 +0200
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 15:40:20 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix argument checking in sched_setaffinity
Message-ID: <20040904134020.GG33964@muc.de>
References: <m3zn4bidlx.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org> <20040831183655.58d784a3.pj@sgi.com> <20040901015922.GM26072@krispykreme>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040901015922.GM26072@krispykreme>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1260
Lines: 28

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:59:22AM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>  
> > I notice that you didn't bother with the fractional byte that is handled
> > by 'endmask' in mm/mempolicy.c:get_nodes().  But I really don't give a
> > hoot - either way is fine by me.
> > 
> > I've written a couple of code snippets that manage to intuit the size of
> > the kernel's cpumask dynamically from user space, by probing with
> > various sched_getaffinity() calls.  But since your patch only changes
> > the errors generated by sched_setaffinity() [that's "set", not "get"], I
> > will not experience any grief from this subtle change in the kernel's
> > API.
> > 
> > Should you lock hotplug before calling get_user_cpu_mask(), since
> > get_user_cpu_mask() depends on cpu_online_mask()?
> 
> FYI the NUMA API and affinity code is broken on 64bit big endian. We
> really need a get/set compat bitmap and use it. How does this look?
> Not well tested yet...

Looks good from a quick review. But there is nothing to call it? 

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/