From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:16:51 -0800 From: Paul Jackson Subject: Re: [RFC 2.6.11-rc2-mm2 0/7] mm: manual page migration -- overview Message-Id: <20050214191651.64fc3347.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <42113921.7070807@sgi.com> References: <20050212032535.18524.12046.26397@tomahawk.engr.sgi.com> <20050212155426.GA26714@logos.cnet> <20050212212914.GA51971@muc.de> <20050214163844.GB8576@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> <20050214191509.GA56685@muc.de> <42113921.7070807@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: Ray Bryant Cc: ak@muc.de, holt@sgi.com, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, raybry@austin.rr.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ray wrote: > [Thus the disclaimer in > the overview note that we have figured all the interaction with > memory policy stuff yet.] Does the same disclaimer apply to cpusets? Unless it causes some undo pain, I would think that page migration should _not_ violate a tasks cpuset. I guess this means that a typical batch manager would move a task to its new cpuset on the new nodes, or move the cpuset containing some tasks to their new nodes, before asking the page migrator to drag along the currently allocated pages from the old location. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401 -- 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: aart@kvack.org