(Executive, aka Andrew, summary: no action items here yet ...)
Christoph sent me some corrections offline to my previous post.
I (pj) had written:
> This patch does not always fix the problem that first motivated it of
> failed memory migrations,
I had misunderstood Christoph's patch. He never intended to fix the
cpuset induced failure of memory migration. He intended to restore
proper behavior of the slab allocator and other kernel subsystems.
Part of my confusion arose from the fact that he took the occassion of
his patch to ask Andrew to drop an earlier patch of ours that -had-
intended, in part, to fix this cpuset-migration interaction.
And part of my confusion was just plain old confusion on my part.
> If I get the chance this weekend, I will at least try to
> write up an lkml post describing some of the '(mis)features' we
> observed during our analysis of this area, under some such Subject
> as "Misfeatures of the kernel allocators and memory policy."
I won't get that far. I'm still working with Christoph offline to make
sense of this. Hopefully I won't drive him to drink first ;-).
I still hope to have a much improved, agreed to by Christoph, patch to
fix the cpuset-migration interaction, posted to lkml in a day or two.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
