On Jul 25 14:15, Mark Geisert wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > > > On Jul 1 01:55, Mark Geisert wrote: > > > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > > On Jun 30 15:59, Mark Geisert wrote: > > > > > This patch supplies an implementation of the CPU_SET(3) processor > > > > > affinity macros as documented on the relevant Linux man page. > > > > > --- > > > > > winsup/cygwin/include/sys/cpuset.h | 62 > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > > > winsup/cygwin/sched.cc | 8 ++-- > > > > > 2 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > > [...] > > > > > +#define CPU_SETSIZE 1024 // maximum number of logical processors > > > > > tracked > > > > > +#define NCPUBITS (8 * sizeof (__cpu_mask)) // max size of > > > > > processor group > > > > > +#define CPU_GROUPMAX (CPU_SETSIZE / NCPUBITS) // maximum group > > > > > number > > > > > -#define __CPUELT(cpu) ((cpu) / __NCPUBITS) > > > > > -#define __CPUMASK(cpu) ((__cpu_mask) 1 << ((cpu) % __NCPUBITS)) > > > > > +#define CPU_WORD(cpu) ((cpu) / NCPUBITS) > > > > > +#define CPU_MASK(cpu) ((__cpu_mask) 1 << ((cpu) % NCPUBITS)) > > > > > > > > I wouldn't do that. Three problems: > > > > [...] > > > > There's also the request from Sebastian on the newlib list to > > > > consolidate the cpuset stuff from RTEMS and Cygwin into a single > > > > definition. > > > > [...] > > > I've also found that taskset isn't working properly on my build system > > > with > > > the new CPU_SET code, though my other testcases are. So even as > > > submitted, > > > and fixed per your comments here, there's a bit more to be done. > > > > > > ..mark > > > > any chance to pick this up again? > > Hi; yes, certainly. I'm back but ill.
I hope it's nothing serious. Please make sure you're getting well before diving too deep into code again :) > It may be a week or so before I have > an update/fix. Top of my list of pending items that require concentration > ;-). > > ..mark Sounds good to me. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
