lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Introduce nodemask_t ADT [0/7]
--On Thursday, March 18, 2004 15:37:10 -0800 Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@sgi.com> wrote:

> On Thursday 18 March 2004 3:32 pm, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>> I think the closest answer we have is that it's a grouping of cpus and
>> memory, where either may be NULL.
>
> Yep, that seems to make the most sense, but then part of me wants to
> drop the term node and never use it again :)

Hey, *I* wasn't the one who started splitting their h/w into wierdo pieces ;-)
Anyway, it's a damned sight shorter than "cpumemset".

>> I/O isn't directly associated with a node, though it should fit into the
>> topo infrastructure, to give distances from io buses to nodes (for which
>> I think we currently use cpumasks, which is probably wrong in retrospect,
>> but then life is tough and flawed ;-))
>
> It's probably not too late to change this to
> pcibus_to_nodemask(pci_bus *), or pci_to_nodemask(pci_dev *), there
> aren't that many callers, are there (my grep is still running)?

It probably shouldn't have anything to do with PCI directly either,
so .... ;-) My former thought was that you might just want the most
local memory for DMAing into.

M.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:0.121 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site