Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:11:39 -0400 | | From | Rik van Riel <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 09/40] autonuma: introduce kthread_bind_node() |
| |
On 06/29/2012 12:04 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 11:36 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: >> On 06/28/2012 08:55 AM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: >> >>> --- a/include/linux/sched.h >>> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h >>> @@ -1792,7 +1792,7 @@ extern void thread_group_times(struct task_struct *p, cputime_t *ut, cputime_t * >>> #define PF_SWAPWRITE 0x00800000 /* Allowed to write to swap */ >>> #define PF_SPREAD_PAGE 0x01000000 /* Spread page cache over cpuset */ >>> #define PF_SPREAD_SLAB 0x02000000 /* Spread some slab caches over cpuset */ >>> -#define PF_THREAD_BOUND 0x04000000 /* Thread bound to specific cpu */ >>> +#define PF_THREAD_BOUND 0x04000000 /* Thread bound to specific cpus */ >>> #define PF_MCE_EARLY 0x08000000 /* Early kill for mce process policy */ >>> #define PF_MEMPOLICY 0x10000000 /* Non-default NUMA mempolicy */ >>> #define PF_MUTEX_TESTER 0x20000000 /* Thread belongs to the rt mutex tester */ >> >> Changing the semantics of PF_THREAD_BOUND without so much as >> a comment in your changelog or buy-in from the scheduler >> maintainers is a big no-no. > > In fact I've already said a number of times this patch isn't going > anywhere.
Which is probably fine, because I see no reason why Andrea's numa threads would need PF_THREAD_BOUND in the first place.
Andrea?
-- All rights reversed
|  |