[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.0.9999.0710261416160.11594@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
cc: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, clameter@....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, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> You don't need to save the entire mask--just note that NODE_MASK_ALL was
> passed--like with my internal MPOL_CONTEXT flag. This would involve
> special casing NODE_MASK_ALL in the error checking, as currently
> set_mempolicy() complains loudly if you pass non-allowed nodes--see
> "contextualize_policy()". [mbind() on the other hand, appears to allow
> any nodemask, even outside the cpuset. guess we catch this during
> allocation.] This is pretty much the spirit of my patch w/o the API
> change/extension [/improvement :)]
>
Not really, because perhaps your application doesn't want to interleave
over all nodes. I suggested NODE_MASK_ALL as the way to get access to all
the memory you are allowed, but it's certainly plausible that an
application could request to interleave only over a subset. That's the
entire reason set_mempolicy(MPOL_INTERLEAVE) takes a nodemask anyway right
now instead of just using task->mems_allowed on each allocation.
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