linux-kernel - Re: [tip:sched/numa] sched/numa: Introduce sys_numa

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 May 2012 10:25:03 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
cc:	mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	pjt@...gle.com, bharata.rao@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Lee.Schermerhorn@...com, aarcange@...hat.com, danms@...ibm.com,
	suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/numa] sched/numa: Introduce sys_numa_{t,m}bind()

On Fri, 18 May 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:

> I like your code for handling smaller processes in NUMA
> systems, but we do need to have a serious discussion on
> how to handle processes that do not fit in one node.

The home node seems to be associated with a thread and not a process. So
we would be able to have multiple home nodes per process.

The whole NUMA policy thing is already quite complex and this will
increase that complexity somewhat. Wish we could simplify things somehow.


--
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/