From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document Linux Memory Policy Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:09:18 +0200 References: <1180467234.5067.52.camel@localhost> <200706011221.33062.ak@suse.de> <20070601122514.GF10459@minantech.com> In-Reply-To: <20070601122514.GF10459@minantech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706011509.18433.ak@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , Christoph Lameter , linux-mm , Andrew Morton List-ID: > > > I can't rely on this anyway and > > > have to assume that numa_*_memory() call is ignored and prefault. > > > > It's either use shared/anonymous memory or process policy. > That is where confusion is. You use words "shared memory" here. Is shared > memory created with mmap(MAP_SHARED) is not "shared" enough? It's file backed. > > > I think Lee's patches should be applied ASAP to fix this inconsistency. > > > > They have serious semantic problems. > > > Can you point me to thread where this was discussed? See the thread following the patches. -Andi -- 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