Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:54:31 -0700 | | From | Paul Jackson <> | | Subject | Re: [patch 3/3] cpusets: add memory_spread_user option |
| |
> Will it handle the case of MPOL_INTERLEAVE policy on a shm segment that > is mapped by tasks in different, possibly disjoint, cpusets. Local > allocation does, and my patch does. That was one of the primary > goals--to address an issue that Christoph has with shared policies. > cpusets really muck these up!
It probably won't handle that. I don't get along too well with shmem.
Can you to an anti-shmem bigot how MPOL_INTERLEAVE should work with shmem segments mapped in diverse ways by different tasks in different cpusets? What would be the key attribute(s) of a proper solution? Maybe if we keep it simple enough, I can avoid mucking it up too much this time around.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
|  |