[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.0.9999.0710251826020.8024@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...e.de, clameter@....com,
Lee.Schermerhorn@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Can we call this "memory_spread_user" instead, or something else
> matching "memory_spread_*" ?
>
Sounds better. I was hoping somebody was going to come forward with an
alternative that sounded better than interleave_over_allowed.
> How about instead of your current_cpuset_interleaved_mems() routine
> that returns a nodemask, rather have a routine that returns a Boolean,
> indicating whether this new flag is set, used as in:
> if (cpuset_is_memory_spread_user())
> tmp = cpuset_current_mems_allowed();
> else
> nodes_remap(tmp, pol->v.nodes, *mpolmask, *newmask);
> pol->v.nodes = tmp;
>
That sounds reasonable, it will simply be a wrapper around
is_interleave_over_allowed() or what we're now calling is_spread_user().
> The existing kernel code for mm/mempolicy.c:mpol_rebind_policy()
> looks buggy to me. The node_remap() call for the MPOL_INTERLEAVE
> case seems like it should come before, not after, updating mpolmask
> to the newmask. Fixing that, and consolidating the multiple lines
> doing "*mpolmask = *newmask" for each case, into a single such line
> at the end of the switch(){} statement, results in the following
> patch. Could you confirm my suspicions and push this one too.
> It should be a part of your patch set, so we don't waste Andrew's
> time resolving the inevitable patch collisions we'll see otherwise.
>
For setting current->il_next, both cases work but yours will be better
balanced for the next interleaved allocation. I'll apply it to my
patchset.
Thanks for the review.
David
-
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