score support for cpuset validation

[Gedare Bloom]

Does it make sense to have separate methods for the validation of the
different cases? I would think the usage would be "err =
validate(cpuset *s);" which could be propagated through the return
value regardless of the condition?

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Joel Sherrill
<joel.sherrill at oarcorp.com> wrote:
>
> And in case the error cases are not completely clear,
> do a "man pthread_setaffinity_np" on Linux and see
> the errors returned. :)
>
>
> On 11/26/2013 1:15 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> FWIW these are likely three separate methods. We may
>> need a new handler. So think long term when making
>> suggestions.
>>
>> On 11/26/2013 1:11 PM, Jennifer Averett wrote:
>>> I’d like to add a method to the super core to validate
>>>
>>> a cpuset:
>>>
>>> 1)       Can’t have a cpuset that is sets a cpu greater than the number
>>> of cores
>>>
>>> 2)      Can’t have a cpuset  that is sets a cpu that is turned off or
>>> not running rtems…
>>>
>>> 3)      Can’t have a cpuset with no cpu’s selected.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any suggestions for a method name, location, … ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jennifer Averett
>>>
>>> On-Line Applications Research
>>>
>>> 256-319-2752
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
> joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
> Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
> Support Available                (256) 722-9985
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at rtems.org
> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel