[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, Paul Jackson wrote:

> Christoph wrote:
> > Yes. We should default to Choice B. Add an option MPOL_MF_RELATIVE to
> > enable that functionality? A new version of numactl can then enable
> > that by default for newer applications.
> I'm confused. If B is the default, then we don't need a flag to
> enable it, rather we need a flag to go back to the old choice A.

Dont we need it for numactl to preserve backward compatibility? numactl
can set that flag by default for newer software. We likely need a new
major release of numactl.

> Perhaps, either way, whatever compatibility flag we have should be
> something that can be forced on an application from the outside,
> perhaps as a per-system mode flag in /sys, or a per-cpuset mode flag,
> or a per-task operation, by what mechanism is not clear.

libnuma can take of that. But we need to have that flag for numactl to be
backward compatible.

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: 2007-10-27 04:53    [W:0.104 / U:23.576 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site