From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 11:49:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 4/5] Mem Policy: cpuset-independent interleave policy In-Reply-To: <470B1C77.1080001@google.com> Message-ID: References: <20070830185053.22619.96398.sendpatchset@localhost> <20070830185122.22619.56636.sendpatchset@localhost> <46E86148.9060400@google.com> <1189690357.5013.19.camel@localhost> <470B1C77.1080001@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ethan Solomita Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de, mtk-manpages@gmx.net, eric.whitney@hp.com List-ID: On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Ethan Solomita wrote: > Do we want do_get_mempolicy() to return a policy number with > MPOL_CONTEXT set? That's what's happening with this patch, and I expect it'll > confuse userland apps, e.g. numactl. Do we have a consistent way to deal with MPOL_CONTEXT now? I thought this was just to test some ideas. -- 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