linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710261409420.18055@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Lee.Schermerhorn@...com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, David Rientjes wrote:

> You would pass NODE_MASK_ALL if your intent was to interleave over 
> everything you have access to, yes.  Otherwise you can pass whatever you 
> want access to and your interleaved nodemask becomes 
> mpol_rebind_policy()'s newmask formal (the cpuset's new mems_allowed) 
> AND'd with pol->passed_nodemask.

We would need two fields in the policy structure

1. The specified nodemask (generally ignored)

2. The effective nodemask (specified & cpuset_mems_allowed)

If we have these two then its easy to get a bit further by making
the first nodemask a relative nodemask. The calculation of the effective
nodemask changes somewhat but the logic is then applicable to MPOL_BIND as 
well.

-
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/