[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c1475d8e-3ad6-cdab-5cc9-b44fef998636@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:34:36 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: linux-mm@...ck.org, mhocko@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
rientjes@...gle.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
shakeelb@...gle.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
gthelen@...gle.com, a.manzanares@...sung.com,
heekwon.p@...sung.com, gim.jongmin@...sung.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm/migrate: export whether or not node is toptier in
sysf
On 4/16/22 20:49, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> This allows userspace to know if the node is considered fast
> memory (with CPUs attached to it). While this can be already
> derived without a new file, this helps further encapsulate the
> concept.
What is userspace supposed to *do* with this, though?
What does "attached" mean?
Isn't it just asking for trouble to add (known) redundancy to the ABI?
It seems like a recipe for future inconsistency.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists