Hello, On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 03:53:37PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > It seems confusing if there're two interaces but they actually mean > the same thing. > > Another reason I didn't do this is, they're not always the same. When > !sane, If cpus_allowed is empty, effective_cpus is not empty, and you > are not able to put tasks into this cpuset. So if we want to expose > it unconditionally, I'll make sure cpus_allowed == effective_cpus > always stand when !sane. Do you think that'll be convoluted? Otherwise, sounds like a nice thing to do anyway. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
