[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0803081414460.12095@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 14:20:14 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
cc: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
clameter@....com, ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm 2/2] mempolicy: use default_policy mode instead of
MPOL_DEFAULT
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> I have a patch queued up, waiting for things to settle down in
> mempolicy.c, to replace the policy/mode in default_policy with
> MPOL_PREFERRED with preferred_node = -1. Then, we can remove all of the
> MPOL_DEFAULT cases out of the switches in the allocation paths and
> "clean up" the documentation, including man pages. MPOL_DEFAULT becomes
> simply an API mechanism to request fall back to the surrounding policy
> scope which, to my mind, is what "default policy" means.
>
Ok, I'll await your patch that switches default_policy.policy to
MPOL_PREFERRED.
Using MPOL_DEFAULT purely for falling back to the task or system-wide
policy, however, seems confusing. The semantics seem to indicate that
MPOL_DEFAULT represents the system-wide default policy without any
preferred node or set of nodes to bind or interleave. So if a VMA has a
policy of MPOL_DEFAULT then, to me, it seems like that indicates the
absence of a specific policy, not a mandate to fallback to the task
policy.
--
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