On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:24:17AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > Yes I explicitly avoided touching parse_cpumask because I don't want to change > behavior of other tools if I'm not confident with that. Would above two > patches fix oslat too (which I didn't check)? If so, I'll be fine to have this > patch dropped. Otherwise I tend to prefer fixing oslat first. We can further > rework the common code, but if existing tools are fine, then I don't think it's > a bugfix, so no need to rush. While I'll count this patch as a real bugfix, so > I'd hope we could consider merging it earlier. As I said, I would really appreciated if all tools behave the same way. Having oslat be special is going to be pain in the long run. Just update parse_cpumask, it's not that difficult :)
