Alan Cox wrote:

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 11:06, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

quoted

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

Agreed.  This is a first pass (well 3rd, but the first two were long ago),
and I'll probably immitate the sys_sched_(s|g)etaffinity calls (even more
than I already have ;) and add a 'length' argument in the next itteration.

Cheers!

-Matt

--
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/