From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:10:15 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Cpuset hardwall flag: Introduction Message-Id: <20080305101015.cdff44f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080305062318.3c7538c3.pj@sgi.com> References: <20080305075237.608599000@menage.corp.google.com> <20080305062318.3c7538c3.pj@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Paul Jackson Cc: menage@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 06:23:18 -0600 Paul Jackson wrote: > Paul M wrote: > > Currently the cpusets mem_exclusive flag is overloaded to mean both > > "no-overlapping" and "no GFP_KERNEL allocations outside this cpuset". > > > > These patches add a new mem_hardwall flag with just the allocation > > restriction part of the mem_exclusive semantics, without breaking > > backwards-compatibility for those who continue to use just > > mem_exclusive. > > ... too bad this nice comment wasn't included in PATCH 2/2, so that > it would automatically make it into the record of history - the source > control log message (as best I understand how Andrew's tools work, > comments off in their own, codeless patch "PATCH 0/N" don't make > it to the source control log, except when Andrew chooses to make a > special effort.) I make that special effort almost 100% of the time. The changelog for the first patch becomes: This patch: -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org