David Miller wrote: > From: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:39:05 -0500 > >> As for making it ARCH specific, that doesn't really help since not >> all PPC hw has the limitation I spoke of. Not even all MPIC (in our >> cases) have the limitation. > > Since the PPC code knows exactly which MPICs have the problem the > PPC code is where the constraining can occur. > > I agree completely with the suggestion that the arch code has to > interpret the cpumask as appropriate for the hardware, since the > user can stick "illegal" values there anyways.
Sorry for delay in replying to this. And sorry for causing regression on some ppc platforms. I totally agree with what Dave said above. ALL_CPUS is a sane default, platform code has to sanity check masks passed via set_affinity() calls anyway. So I beleive it should be fixed in the platform code. Max _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
