Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762082AbZCPSCe (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:02:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761030AbZCPRzn (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:55:43 -0400 Received: from smtp.ultrahosting.com ([74.213.174.254]:41402 "EHLO smtp.ultrahosting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761047AbZCPRzm (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:55:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:41:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@qirst.com To: David Rientjes cc: Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Paul Menage , Randy Dunlap , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch -mm v2] cpusets: add memory_slab_hardwall flag In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 552 Lines: 10 If the nodes are exclusive to a load then the cpus attached to those nodes are also exclusive? If so then there is no problem since the percpu queues are only in use for a specific load with a consistent restriction on cpusets and a consistent memory policy. Thus there is no need for memory_slab_hardwall. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/