Re: #define NR_TASKS ??

To: debian-beowulf@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: #define NR_TASKS ??
From: Sven Rudolph <sr1@loom.sax.de>
Date: 24 May 2001 11:56:18 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 873d9vxe7x.fsf@loom.sax.de>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20010523133336.U11829@cistron.nl>
References: <[🔎] 20010523163043.C23883@phi.kappa.beta> <[🔎] 20010523133336.U11829@cistron.nl>

Wichert Akkerman <wichert@valinux.com> writes:

> Previously Viral wrote:
> > For the time being I defined it to be 1024 (hoping thats large and safe) but
> > whats the deal with NR_TASKS in 2.4.4 ? 
> 
> There is no NR_TASKS anymore, programs should just deal with the possibility
> of an unlimited number of processes.

And user-level shouldn't have used it anyway because running a kernel
with a higher NR_TASKS required recompiling top.

        Sven
-- 
Sven Rudolph <sr1@sax.de>		http://www.sax.de/~sr1/

Reply to:

References:
- #define NR_TASKS ??
  - From: Viral <viral@debian.org>
- Re: #define NR_TASKS ??
  - From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@valinux.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Creating a Packages and Sources file.
Next by Date: RE: Creating a Packages and Sources file.
Previous by thread: Re: #define NR_TASKS ??
Next by thread: Re: #define NR_TASKS ??
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread