Re: [rfc][patch] Memory Binding API v0.3 2.5.41

Arjan van de Ven
2002-10-10T10:00:40Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

> +/**
> + * sys_mem_setbinding - set the memory binding of a process
> + * @pid: pid of the process
> + * @memblks: new bitmask of memory blocks
> + * @behavior: new behavior
> + */
> +asmlinkage long sys_mem_setbinding(pid_t pid, unsigned long memblks,
> + unsigned int behavior)
> +{

Do you really think exposing low level internals as memory layout / zone
split up to userspace is a good idea ? (and worth it given that the VM
already has a cpu locality preference?)

I'd much rather see the VM have an arch-specified "cost" for getting
memory from not-the-prefered zones than exposing all this stuff to
userspace and depending on userspace to do the right thing.... it's the
kernel's task to abstract the low level details of the hardware after
all.

Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]