On 03/11/2015 04:46 PM, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
Continuation of cpumask discussion on the call… For creating arbitrary
masks (e.g. fill in a mask with CPU ids of another ODP program in the
system, or testing all possible mask bits), we may need two more calls:
/**
* @return Maximum number of CPUs a mask can hold
*/
int odp_cpumask_max_cpus(void)
/**
* Set all CPUs in the mask
*
* After the call, the mask has odp_cpumask_max_cpus() CPUs set.
* @note CPU numbering may not be contiguous.
*/
void odp_cpumask_setall(odp_cpumask_t *mask)
-Petri
*From:*lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org
[mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] *On Behalf Of *ext Savolainen,
Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 11, 2015 2:09 PM
*To:* ext Christophe Milard; lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
*Subject:* Re: [lng-odp] odp_cpu_count() vs odp_cpumask size
Actually, this is equal to odp_cpu_max():
odp_cpumask_t mask;
odp_cpu_mask(&mask)
odp_cpumask_last(&mask)
So maybe odp_cpu_mask() is only new thing we need.
Hi Petri
It is not clear to me why do we need odp_cpu_* and odp_cpumask_* API.
They are used now to create threads and set CPU affinity. But this is
done by ODP helpers, because it is out of ODP scope. Shouldn't 'cpu' and
'cpumask' be a part of helpers too?
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
