Thread (29 messages) 29 messages, 9 authors, 2002-10-15

Re: [rfc][patch] Memory Binding API v0.3 2.5.41

From: Alan Cox <hidden>
Date: 2002-10-10 11:06:28
Also in: lkml

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 11:06, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
quoted
+/**
+ * sys_mem_setbinding - set the memory binding of a process
+ * @pid: pid of the process
+ * @memblks: new bitmask of memory blocks
+ * @behavior: new behavior
+ */
+asmlinkage long sys_mem_setbinding(pid_t pid, unsigned long memblks, 
+				    unsigned int behavior)
+{
Do you really think exposing low level internals as memory layout / zone
split up to userspace is a good idea ? (and worth it given that the VM
already has a cpu locality preference?)
At least in the embedded world that level is a good idea. I'm not sure
about the syscall interface. An "unsigned long" mask of blocks sounds
like a good way to ensure a broken syscall in the future

--
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/
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help