Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 07 Jul 2015 22:33:19 -0700
From:      Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
To:        Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Cc:        Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>,  Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: CFT/CFR: NUMA policy branch
Message-ID:  <559CB61F.2070301@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <2926903.YAk7qUEGf9@akita>
References:  <CAJ-Vmo=SnqXTF5m65haKqrVf699zinyXs%2BQdvR6V88CW7vooCw@mail.gmail.com> <20150707093747.GE2080@kib.kiev.ua> <CAJ-VmomE4a3R59vbDbZBFcngKOEyNfLs43HW6S_KMbJbxEZHCw@mail.gmail.com> <2926903.YAk7qUEGf9@akita>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 7/7/15 7:43 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 15:53:18 Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>>> I did not read further, the patch is half-done at best.
>> That's lovely. Meanwhile, people are actively using this thing.
> It may not be perfect, but it's way more than half done.  You might object to
> introducing the syscalls, but procctl is still annoyingly limited.
>
(not yelling at you Rui)... but really... Is that the problem?!!? Just 
write a userland library to abstract the kernel interface!

-Alfred



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?559CB61F.2070301>