Christoph wrote:
> Correct. We could implement the changing of policies via an extension
> of the existing libnuma. That could be easily done as far as I can
> tell. If that is done then the patch that I proposed is no longer
> necessary. But then libnuma needs to also be extended to
>
> 1. Allow the discovery of the memory policies of each vma for each
> process
I'm missing something here. Are you saying that just a change to
libnuma would suffice to accomplish what you sought with this patch?
If that's the case, we don't need a kernel patch, right?
And despite Andi's urging us to only access these facilities via
libnuma, there is no law to that affect that I know of. At the least,
you could present user level only code that accomplished the object
of this patch set, with no kernel change.
I don't think that is possible, short of gross hackery on /dev/mem.
I think some sort of kernel change is required to enable one task to
change the numa policy of another task.
What the heck, over ??
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
