lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch 3/4] mempolicy: add MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES flag
    Lee wrote:
    > 1) we've discussed the issue of returning EINVAL for non-empty nodemasks
    > with MPOL_DEFAULT. By removing this restriction, we run the risk of
    > breaking applications if we should ever want to define a semantic to
    > non-empty node mask for MPOL_DEFAULT.

    The bigger risk, in my view, is breaking some piece of existing user code.
    Properly written user code wouldn't break, but that doesn't mean much.
    Changes, even minor corner case changes, often break something, so should
    not be done with out cause. Whether or not code cleanup in mempolicy.c is
    sufficient cause here is not clear to me.

    Future room for growth doesn't mean so much for me here; if we close one
    future alternative, we always have others, such as more mode flag bits.

    --
    I won't rest till it's the best ...
    Programmer, Linux Scalability
    Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-13 04:55    [W:0.021 / U:1.148 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site