[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090310102926.A47E.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:35:38 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] cpusets: add memory_slab_hardwall flag
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> > Again these are fastpath modifications.
> >
>
> The nature of the change requires the logic to be placed in the fastpath
> to determine whether a cpu slab's node is allowed by the allocating task's
> cpuset.
>
> You have previously stated that you would prefer that this feature be
> tunable from userspace. This patch adds the `memory_slab_hardwall' cpuset
> flag which defaults to off.
That's pointless.
Again, any fastpath modification should have reasonable reason.
We are looking for your explanation.
I have each 6+ year experience on embedded, HPC, and high-end server area.
but I haven't hear this requirement. I still can't imazine who use this feature.
--
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