Re: [PATCH] Fix cpuset sched_relax_domain_level control file

[Paul Jackson]

Paul M wrote:
> I was just trying to get close to the original behaviour.

An honorable goal.

Li Zefan - would you be interested in generating a patch
that fails -EINVAL for inputs outside the range of [-1 ... N]
for whatever small positive N the kernel recognizes?

This seems like a minor enough difference that I for one
don't have any problem with the current code, remapping
all negative inputs to -1, going in, and then a follow-on
patch changing that going in afterward.

Of course, if you or Seto-san prefer the current behaviour,
it would be easy to persuade me to agree.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.940.382.4214
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/