[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:

> > > Now, if we could replace the 'cpuset_mems_allowed' nodemask with a
> > > pointer to something stable, it might be a win.
> >
> > The memory policies are already shared and have refcounters for that
> > purpose.
> I must have missed that in the code I'm reading :)

What is the benefit of having pointers to nodemasks? We likely would need
to have refcounts in those nodemasks too? So we duplicate a lot of
the characteristics of memory policies?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-26 23:41    [W:0.143 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site