From: Ethan Solomita <solo@google.com>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de,
mtk-manpages@gmx.net, clameter@sgi.com, eric.whitney@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 4/5] Mem Policy: cpuset-independent interleave policy
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:20:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E85825.4050505@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070830185122.22619.56636.sendpatchset@localhost>
the feature set I was interested in. One question regarding:
Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
>
> However, this will involve testing possibly several words of
> bitmask in the allocation path. Instead, I chose to encode the
> "context-dependent policy" indication in the upper bits of the
> policy member of the mempolicy structure. This member must
> already be tested to determine the policy mode, so no extra
> memory references should be required. However, for testing the
> policy--e.g., in the several switch() and if() statements--the
> context flag must be masked off using the policy_mode() inline
> function. On the upside, this allows additional flags to be so
> encoded, should that become useful.
Instead of creating MPOL_CONTEXT, did you consider instead creating a
new MPOL for this, such as MPOL_INTERLEAVE_ALL? If the only intended
user of the MPOL_CONTEXT "flag" is just MPOL_INTERLEAVE_ALL, it seems
like you'll have simpler code this way.
-- Ethan
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-12 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-30 18:50 [PATCH/RFC 0/5] Memory Policy Cleanups and Enhancements Lee Schermerhorn
2007-08-30 18:51 ` [PATCH/RFC 1/5] Mem Policy: fix reference counting Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-11 18:48 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 18:12 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 9:45 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-30 18:51 ` [PATCH/RFC 2/5] Mem Policy: Use MPOL_PREFERRED for system-wide default policy Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-11 18:54 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 18:22 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 9:48 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-30 18:51 ` [PATCH/RFC 3/5] Mem Policy: MPOL_PREFERRED fixups for "local allocation" Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-11 18:58 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 18:34 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-12 22:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 13:51 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 18:18 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 9:55 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-12 22:06 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 13:35 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 18:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-30 18:51 ` [PATCH/RFC 4/5] Mem Policy: cpuset-independent interleave policy Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-12 21:20 ` Ethan Solomita [this message]
2007-09-12 22:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 13:26 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 17:17 ` Ethan Solomita
2007-09-12 21:59 ` Ethan Solomita
2007-09-13 13:32 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 17:19 ` Ethan Solomita
2007-09-13 18:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-09 6:15 ` Ethan Solomita
2007-10-09 13:39 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-10-09 18:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-09 19:02 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-08-30 18:51 ` [PATCH/RFC 5/5] Mem Policy: add MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED get_mempolicy() flag Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-11 19:07 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 18:42 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-12 22:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-14 20:24 ` [PATCH] " Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-14 20:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-11 16:20 ` [PATCH/RFC 0/5] Memory Policy Cleanups and Enhancements Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-11 19:12 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 18:45 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-12 22:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 13:57 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 15:31 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-13 15:01 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 18:55 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-13 18:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 18:23 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-13 18:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 21:17 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-14 2:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-14 8:53 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-14 15:06 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-14 17:46 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-14 18:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-16 18:02 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-17 18:12 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-17 18:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-17 20:14 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-17 19:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-17 20:03 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-14 20:15 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-16 18:05 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-16 19:34 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-16 21:22 ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-17 13:29 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-17 18:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 15:49 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-13 18:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-17 19:00 ` [PATCH] Fix NUMA Memory Policy Reference Counting Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-17 19:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-17 19:38 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-17 19:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-19 22:03 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-19 22:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-18 10:36 ` Mel Gorman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46E85825.4050505@google.com \
--to=solo@google.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=eric.whitney@hp.com \
--cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mtk-manpages@gmx.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).