On Mar 18 00:53, Mark Geisert wrote:
> Due to deficient testing, the current code doesn't return a valid result
> to users of sched_getaffinity(). The updated code carries the determined
> procmask through to the generation of result cpu mask.
>
> Recognize Windows' limitation that if the process
From 4f4b5135e229cabacd445e4738dbdc7f8cee45a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christian Franke
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:15:12 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Cygwin: doc: rename sched_setpolicy(2) to
sched_setscheduler(2)
The function sched_setpolicy(2) does not exist.
Fixes: 757424f74400 ("Cygwin: do
On Mar 18 12:20, Christian Franke wrote:
>
> From 4f4b5135e229cabacd445e4738dbdc7f8cee45a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christian Franke
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:15:12 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] Cygwin: doc: rename sched_setpolicy(2) to
> sched_setscheduler(2)
>
> The function sched_setpo
On Mar 17 17:39, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Mar 2025, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > Note: In the long run, we may very well want to follow the insightful
> > suggestion by a helpful Windows kernel engineer who pointed out that it
> > may be less fragile to implement kind
Hi Corinna,
On 3/17/2025 2:18 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 16 13:55, Mark Geisert wrote:
On 3/16/2025 7:09 AM, Christian Franke wrote:
Mark Geisert wrote:
[...]
[..blah blah..]
So, v2 patch incoming shortly. Comments from other folks welcome.
Only one: Thanks for looking into this
Due to deficient testing, the current code doesn't return a valid result
to users of sched_getaffinity(). The updated code carries the determined
procmask through to the generation of result cpu mask.
Recognize Windows' limitation that if the process is multi-group (i.e.,
has threads in multiple
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 17 17:39, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> > Since you kind of asked, here's a proof-of-concept that uses udis86 (I
> > left a whole bunch of pointer<->integer warnings since this is a PoC).
> > Tested on windows 11 and 8:
>
> Cool. I
On Mar 18 10:45, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> > On Mar 17 17:39, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> > > Since you kind of asked, here's a proof-of-concept that uses udis86 (I
> > > left a whole bunch of pointer<->integer warnings s
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Subdir of winsup/cygwin, probably. What I'm most curious about is the
> size it adds to the DLL. I wonder if, say, an extra 32K is really
> usefully spent, given it only checks a small part of ntdll.dll, and only
> once per process tree, too.
I did
On 3/18/2025 10:11 PM, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Subdir of winsup/cygwin, probably. What I'm most curious about is the
size it adds to the DLL. I wonder if, say, an extra 32K is really
usefully spent, given it only checks a small part
10 matches
Mail list logo
