From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:18:54 +0300 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document Linux Memory Policy Message-ID: <20070531121854.GP4715@minantech.com> References: <1180467234.5067.52.camel@localhost> <200705311347.28214.ak@suse.de> <20070531115931.GO4715@minantech.com> <200705311415.11170.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200705311415.11170.ak@suse.de> From: glebn@voltaire.com (Gleb Natapov) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Christoph Lameter , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:15:11PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thursday 31 May 2007 13:59:31 Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 01:47:28PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > No it is not (not always). > > > > > > Natural = as in benefits a large number of application. Your requirement > > > seems to be quite special. > > Really. Is use of shared memory to communicate between two processes so > > rare and special? > > It is more rare that not the first process touching memory is using it more often. > It tends to happen with some memory allocators that reuse memory, but there > is no reasonable way except asking for explicit policy to handle that anyways. > OK. It is possible to achieve exactly what I need with existing API and this is what matters. Thanks. -- Gleb. -- 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