From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f198.google.com (mail-pf0-f198.google.com [209.85.192.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04BEB6B0038 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 20:57:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f198.google.com with SMTP id n24so5724239pfb.0 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x233.google.com (mail-pa0-x233.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400e:c03::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b73si32044400pfb.21.2016.09.19.17.57.19 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-x233.google.com with SMTP id id6so802815pad.3 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:57:17 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy.c: forbid static or relative flags for local NUMA mode In-Reply-To: <20160918112943.1645-1-kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20160918112943.1645-1-kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Piotr Kwapulinski Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mhocko@kernel.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, liangchen.linux@gmail.com, nzimmer@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 18 Sep 2016, Piotr Kwapulinski wrote: > The MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES and MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES flags are irrelevant > when setting them for MPOL_LOCAL NUMA memory policy via set_mempolicy. > Return the "invalid argument" from set_mempolicy whenever > any of these flags is passed along with MPOL_LOCAL. > It is consistent with MPOL_PREFERRED passed with empty nodemask. > It also slightly shortens the execution time in paths where these flags > are used e.g. when trying to rebind the NUMA nodes for changes in > cgroups cpuset mems (mpol_rebind_preferred()) or when just printing > the mempolicy structure (/proc/PID/numa_maps). > Isolated tests done. > > Signed-off-by: Piotr Kwapulinski Acked-by: David Rientjes There wasn't an MPOL_LOCAL when I introduced either of these flags, it's an oversight to allow them to be passed. Want to try to update set_mempolicy(2) with the procedure outlined in https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/patches.html as well? -- 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