* Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > The NUMA_VARIABLE_LOCALITY name slightly misses the real > > point though that NUMA_EMBEDDED tried to stress: it's > > important to realize that these are systems that (ab-)use > > our NUMA memory zoning code to implement support for > > variable speed RAM modules - so they can use the existing > > node binding ABIs. > > > > The cost of that is the losing of the regular NUMA node > > structure. So by all means it's a convenient hack - but the > > name must signal that. I'm not attached to the NUMA_EMBEDDED > > naming overly strongly, but NUMA_VARIABLE_LOCALITY sounds > > more harmless than it should. > > > > Perhaps ARCH_WANT_NUMA_VARIABLE_LOCALITY_OVERRIDE? A tad > > long but we don't want it to be overused in any case. > > > > I had two reasons for not using the NUMA_EMBEDDED name. As I indicated I'm fine with not using that. > I'll go with the long name you suggest even though it's arch > specific because I never want point 2 above to happen anyway. > Maybe the name will poke the next person who plans to abuse > NUMA in the eye hard enough to discourage them. FYI, I've applied a slightly shorter variant in the numa/core tree, will send it out later today. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>