On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, Yisheng Xie wrote: > On 2017/11/6 23:29, Christopher Lameter wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Nov 2017, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > > >> I'm not sure what exactly is the EPERM intention. Should really the > >> capability of THIS process override the cpuset restriction of the TARGET > >> process? Maybe yes. Then, does "insufficient privilege (CAP_SYS_NICE) to > > > > CAP_SYS_NICE never overrides cpuset restrictions. The cap can be used to > > migrate pages that are *also* mapped by other processes (and thus move > > pages of another process which may have different cpu set restrictions!). > > So you means the specified nodes should be a subset of target cpu set, right? The specified nodes need to be part of the *current* cpu set. Migrate pages moves the pages of a single process there is no TARGET process. Thus thehe *target* nodes need to be a subset of the current cpu set. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
