Hi Alex,
index 5248f04ba..00ce287c9 100644
--- a/man2/get_mempolicy.2
+++ b/man2/get_mempolicy.2
@@ -137,7 +137,11 @@ specifies
but not
.BR MPOL_F_ADDR ,
and the thread's current policy is
-.BR MPOL_INTERLEAVE ,
+.B MPOL_INTERLEAVE
+or
+.B MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
+(available since Linux 6.9),
For consistency, I try to use the same phrase everywhere:
(since Linux x.y)
But, in simple mentions, we usually don't specify when a flag was added.
That's already documented in the proper documentation of the flag. So
here, I'd just remove that (and the comment below).
Got it. This was one of those things I was unsure of.
I think I was referencing
> If
> .I flags
> specifies
> .B MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED
> (available since Linux 2.6.24)
from earlier in the file.
+.\" commit fa3bea4e1f8202d787709b7e3654eb0a99aed758
then
.BR get_mempolicy ()
will return in the location pointed to by a non-NULL
@@ -206,7 +210,11 @@ specified
but not
.B MPOL_F_ADDR
and the current thread policy is not
-.BR MPOL_INTERLEAVE .
+.B MPOL_INTERLEAVE
+or
I prefer "nor".
Sure, will change to neither/nor.
+.B MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
+(added in Linux 6.9).
Same here.
I'll drop this one, too.
+.\" commit fa3bea4e1f8202d787709b7e3654eb0a99aed758
Or,
.I flags
specified
diff --git a/man2/mbind.2 b/man2/mbind.2
index b0e961f9c..6f2449946 100644
--- a/man2/mbind.2
+++ b/man2/mbind.2
@@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ argument must specify one of
.BR MPOL_DEFAULT ,
.BR MPOL_BIND ,
.BR MPOL_INTERLEAVE ,
+.BR MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE ,
.BR MPOL_PREFERRED ,
or
.B MPOL_LOCAL
@@ -243,6 +244,23 @@ at least 1\ MB or bigger with a fairly uniform access pattern.
Accesses to a single page of the area will still be limited to
the memory bandwidth of a single node.
.TP
+.BR MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE " (since Linux 6.9)"
+.\" commit fa3bea4e1f8202d787709b7e3654eb0a99aed758
Here is where we usually document the kernel versions. So here (and
in set_mempolicy.2) is good, and enough, I think.
Have a lovely night!
Alex
Sounds good. Yeah, get_mempolicy was getting pretty crowded with the
extra parentheticals, and the hash comments felt out of place.
I'm glad we're OK to drop them outright.
Svetly
