Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752318Ab2E3Tch (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2012 15:32:37 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:48406 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751614Ab2E3Tcf (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2012 15:32:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 21:32:34 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andi Kleen , Linus Torvalds , kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Dave Jones , Mel Gorman , stable@vger.kernel.org, hughd@google.com, sivanich@sgi.com, KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mempolicy memory corruption fixlet Message-ID: <20120530193234.GV27374@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1338368529-21784-1-git-send-email-kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> <20120530184638.GU27374@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 846 Lines: 21 On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 01:50:02PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2012, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > I always regretted that cpusets were no done with custom node lists. > > That would have been much cleaner and also likely faster than what we have. > > Could shared memory policies ignore cpuset constraints? Only if noone uses cpusets as a "security" mechanism, just for a "soft policy" Even with soft policy you could well break someone's setup. Maybe there are some better ways to do that now with memcg, not fully sure. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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/