From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f71.google.com (mail-it0-f71.google.com [209.85.214.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E10F6B0069 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-it0-f71.google.com with SMTP id z65so118383811itc.2 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-po-12v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-12v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:171]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x71si9208623ioe.160.2016.10.13.11.16.23 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:16:21 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: Rewording language in mbind(2) to "threads" not "processes" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: Piotr Kwapulinski , mhocko@kernel.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, riel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Brice Goglin On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > @@ -100,7 +100,10 @@ If, however, the shared memory region was created with the > .B SHM_HUGETLB > flag, > the huge pages will be allocated according to the policy specified > -only if the page allocation is caused by the process that calls > +only if the page allocation is caused by the thread that calls > +.\" > +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "process" to "thread" in the preceding line? No leave it as process. Pages get one map refcount per page table that references them (meaning a process). More than one map refcount means that multiple processes have mapped the page. > @@ -300,7 +303,10 @@ is specified in > .IR flags , > then the kernel will attempt to move all the existing pages > in the memory range so that they follow the policy. > -Pages that are shared with other processes will not be moved. > +Pages that are shared with other threads will not be moved. > +.\" > +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "processes" to "threads" in the preceding line? > +.\" Leave it. Same as before. > If > then the kernel will attempt to move all existing pages in the memory range > -regardless of whether other processes use the pages. > -The calling process must be privileged > +regardless of whether other threads use the pages. > +.\" > +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "processes" to "threads" in the preceding line? > +.\" Leave as process. -- 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