Patches for classic affinity implementation and test

[Joel Sherrill]

Let me make one thing clear so we can quit discussing it. the "have sys cpuset" macro was a nice thing from us to avoid forcing everyone to update their tools immediately.

There is no assumption that cpuset is not present long term and we will NOT provide an alternative internal implementation.

In retrospect, I am beginning to think the effort being nice was wasted because it seems to have just drawn flak. Apparently it is more acceptable to just break things now.

--joel

On Feb 21, 2014 1:58 AM, Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
On 2014-02-20 21:07, Jennifer Averett wrote:
> +#if __RTEMS_HAVE_SYS_CPUSET_H__ && defined( RTEMS_SMP )
> +const Cpuset_Control *_Cpuset_Handler_default(void);
> +#else
> +#define _Cpuset_Handler_default()   do { } while ( 0 )
> +#endif

In case the C library doesn't provide an appropriate <sys/cpuset.h> then we
should provide our own header file.  Maybe we should use a special header file
that either uses <sys/cpuset.h> directly or alternatively provides the missing
declarations and functions.

I don't think it makes sense to use a SMP configuration with this API.

--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
rtems-devel mailing list
rtems-devel at rtems.org
http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140221/c8ba2630/attachment-0001.html>