From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brice Goglin Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 15:32:01 +0200 Message-ID: <4A0828D1.4040109@inria.fr> References: <000c01c9d212$4c244720$e46cd560$@rwth-aachen.de> <87zldjn597.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87zldjn597.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Sender: linux-numa-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Andi Kleen Cc: Stefan Lankes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > Stefan Lankes writes: > >> [Patch 1/4]: Extend the system call madvise with a new parameter >> MADV_ACCESS_LWP (the same as used in Solaris). The specified memory area >> > > Linux does NUMA memory policies in mbind(), not madvise() > Also if there's a new NUMA policy it should be in the standard > Linux NUMA memory policy frame work, not inventing a new one > Marking a buffer as "migrate-on-next-touch" is very different from setting a NUMA policy. Migrate-on-next-touch a temporary flag that is cleared on the next-touch. It's cleared per page, not per area or whatever. So marking a VMA as "migrate-on-next-touch" doesn't make much sense since some pages could already have been migrated (and brought back to their usual state) while some other are still marked as migrate-on-next-touch. Brice