Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Paul Jackson wrote:

> > Tough. The API needs to remain stable. 
> 
> Good - that I understand.  Your position is clear now.
> 
> You have chosen (1) above, which keeps Choice A as the default.

There can be different defaults for the user space API via libnuma that 
are indepdent from the kernel API which needs to remain stable. The kernel 
API can be extended but not changed.
 
> > Hmmm.. The alternative is to add new set/get mempolicy functions.
> 
> Other alternatives include a per-system, per-cpuset or per-process
> flag, in addition to the per-system call flag you suggested earlier
> (MPOL_MF_RELATIVE), or whatever you mean by "new set/get mempolicy
> functions" ... could you elaborate on that one?

None of those sound appealing. Multiple processes may run in one cpuset. 
Some of those may be linked to older libnumas and therefore depend on old 
behavior.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 1/2] cpusets: extract mmarray loading from update_nodemask
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] SG: set names for numeric constants
• Next by Date: Re: epoll design problems with common fork/exec patterns
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]