From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:45:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH] populated_map: fix !NUMA case, remove comment In-Reply-To: <20070612014357.GD3798@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20070611202728.GD9920@us.ibm.com> <20070611221036.GA14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611225213.GB14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611234155.GG14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612000705.GH14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612014357.GD3798@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, anton@samba.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > Ah, but we'll use it in mpol_new via nodes_and() regardless of > NUMA/!NUMA, right? mempolicy.c will only be compiled for the NUMA case. > If you really feel that only CONFIG_NUMA code should use > node_populated_mask, then I'll make that change and use node_populated() > in the callers. What point would there be of !NUMA configurations using node_populated_mask()? -- 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