Skip to content

Change sched_setaffinity's PID argument to pid_t #600

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 15, 2017

Conversation

tokenrove
Copy link
Contributor

I might be missing something as to why this argument was made isize, but there's nothing obvious from the commit history, and other calls that work with thread IDs in this library return pid_t, so hopefully this is a nit and not noise.

@Susurrus
Copy link
Contributor

I'd like to get the FreeBSD build passing, which should just require you re-pushing this branch. Otherwise I think it's RTM.

The officially documented type, and the type in sched.h, for this
argument is pid_t.
@tokenrove tokenrove force-pushed the setaffinity-pid-argument branch from b4ffeac to d50f569 Compare June 15, 2017 10:39
@tokenrove
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is that better?

@asomers
Copy link
Member

asomers commented Jun 15, 2017

No, buildbot is too "smart" for you. Repushing that old commit does not trigger a rebuild. But in this case it doesn't matter. That file is not even included in the FreeBSD build.
bors r+

@asomers
Copy link
Member

asomers commented Jun 15, 2017

Hm, bors isn't picking up the PR. Does the magic comment need to be double spaced? Let's try.

bors r+

bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 15, 2017
600: Change sched_setaffinity's PID argument to pid_t r=asomers

I might be missing something as to why this argument was made `isize`, but there's nothing obvious from the commit history, and other calls that work with thread IDs in this library return `pid_t`, so hopefully this is a nit and not noise.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Jun 15, 2017

@bors bors bot merged commit d50f569 into nix-rust:master Jun 15, 2017
@notriddle
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, we changed it recently so that the comment needs to be on its own. The idea if to make sure that people don't trigger builds because they happen to mention the possibility of saying "bors r+".

@Susurrus
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @tokenrove for your PR!

@tokenrove
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks! I have a backlog of (only slightly less trivial) contributions to submit. This is a good reminder to do so.

@Susurrus
Copy link
Contributor

Excellent, look forward to reviewing them!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants