| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:37:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, David Rientjes wrote: > Adds a new 'interleave_over_allowed' option to cpusets. > > When a task with an MPOL_INTERLEAVE memory policy is attached to a cpuset > with this option set, the interleaved nodemask becomes the cpuset's > mems_allowed. When the cpuset's mems_allowed changes, the interleaved > nodemask for all tasks with MPOL_INTERLEAVE memory policies is also > updated to be the new mems_allowed nodemask. > > This allows applications to specify that they want to interleave over all > nodes that they are allowed to access. This set of nodes can be changed > at any time via the cpuset interface and each individual memory policy is > updated to reflect the changes for all attached tasks when this option is > set. More interactions between cpusets and memory policies. We have to be careful here to keep clean semantics. Isnt it a bit surprising for an application that has set up a custom MPOL_INTERLEAVE policy if the nodes suddenly change because of a cpuset or mems_allowed change? - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists