linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.20][PATCH] fix mempolicy error check on a system with memory-less-node

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 7 Feb 2007 06:03:29 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
cc:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	GOTO <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@...r.sgi.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.20][PATCH] fix mempolicy error check on a system with
 memory-less-node

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:

> IMHO there shouldn't be any memory less nodes. The architecture code
> should not create them. The CPU should be assigned to a nearby node instead.
> At least x86-64 ensures that.

Yes I wish we would do it that way on all platforms. SGI's SN2 does that 
too.



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/