lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] mempolicy memory corruption fixlet
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 01:50:02PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> > On Wed, 30 May 2012, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> >
>> > > I always regretted that cpusets were no done with custom node lists.
>> > > That would have been much cleaner and also likely faster than what we have.
>> >
>> > Could shared memory policies ignore cpuset constraints?
>>
>> Only if noone uses cpusets as a "security" mechanism, just for a "soft policy"
>> Even with soft policy you could well break someone's setup.
>
> Well at least lets exempt shared memory from memory migration and memory
> policy updates. That seems to be causing many of these issues.

Yes, that's right direction, I think. Currently, shmem_set_policy() can't handle
nonlinear mapping. vma -> file offset transration is not so easy work
and I doubt
we should do.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-30 22:01    [W:1.570 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site