[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1609191755060.53329@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Piotr Kwapulinski <kwapulinski.piotr@...il.com>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, mhocko@...nel.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
liangchen.linux@...il.com, nzimmer@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy.c: forbid static or relative flags for
local NUMA mode
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016, Piotr Kwapulinski wrote:
> The MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES and MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES flags are irrelevant
> when setting them for MPOL_LOCAL NUMA memory policy via set_mempolicy.
> Return the "invalid argument" from set_mempolicy whenever
> any of these flags is passed along with MPOL_LOCAL.
> It is consistent with MPOL_PREFERRED passed with empty nodemask.
> It also slightly shortens the execution time in paths where these flags
> are used e.g. when trying to rebind the NUMA nodes for changes in
> cgroups cpuset mems (mpol_rebind_preferred()) or when just printing
> the mempolicy structure (/proc/PID/numa_maps).
> Isolated tests done.
>
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Kwapulinski <kwapulinski.piotr@...il.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
There wasn't an MPOL_LOCAL when I introduced either of these flags, it's
an oversight to allow them to be passed.
Want to try to update set_mempolicy(2) with the procedure outlined in
https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/patches.html as well?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists