[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110804220723.GB4388@optiplex.tchesoft.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 19:07:24 -0300
From: Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Stephen Wilson <wilsons@...rt.ca>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy.c: make sys_mbind & sys_set_mempolicy aware
of task_struct->mems_allowed
Howdy folks,
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 06:59:33PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com> writes:
>
> > Among several other features enabled when CONFIG_CPUSETS is defined,
> > task_struct is enhanced with the nodemask_t mems_allowed element that
> > serves to register/report on which memory nodes the task may obtain
> > memory. Also, two new lines that reflect the value registered at
> > task_struct->mems_allowed are added to the '/proc/[pid]/status' file:
>
> As Christoph said this was intentionally designed this way. Originally
> there was some consideration of "relative policies", but that is not
> implemented and had various issues.
>
> They're orthogonal mechanisms.
I'd like to thank you all for taking time to look at my proposal, and
providing such a good fix for my misconceptions.
I really appreciate all your feedback.
Cheers!
--
Rafael Azenha Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Software Maintenance Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
+55 51 3392.6288 / +55 51 9979.8008
--
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