Lee,
I'll make the required changes to the patch below, if you can just Ack /
clarify them.
Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
PATCH Man pages - add MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED to get_mempolicy(2)
Update the get_mempolicy(2) man page to add in the description of
the MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED flag, added in 2.6.23.
Signed-off-by: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@xxxxxx>
man2/get_mempolicy.2 | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
Index: man-pages-3.05/man2/get_mempolicy.2
===================================================================
--- man-pages-3.05.orig/man2/get_mempolicy.2 2008-07-29 16:44:06.000000000 -0400
+++ man-pages-3.05/man2/get_mempolicy.2 2008-07-29 16:44:28.000000000 -0400
@@ -66,6 +66,29 @@ using
If
.I flags
specifies
+.BR MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED ,
I think we need a version number here, so that users know when the flag was
added. It';s 2.6.24, right?
+the
+.I mode
+argument is ignored and
+the set of nodes [memories] that the process is allowed to specify
+in subsequent calls to
+.BR mbind (2)
+or
+.BR set_mempolicy (2)
+[in the absense of any
+.IR "mode flags" ]
+is returned in
+.IR nodemask .
+Use of
+.B MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED
+is mutually exclusive with use of
+.B MPOL_F_ADDR
+and
+.BR MPOL_F_NODE .
I'd prefer to word that as something like:
It is not permitted to combine MPOL_F_MEMS_ALLOWED
with either MPOL_F_ADDR or MPOL_F_NODE.
Is that reformulation okay?
Also, the patch should include an addition to ERRORS noting what error occurs
if this rule is violated. Looks like the error is EINVAL, right? If so I'll
add that piece to the page, after applying this patch.
Cheers,
Michael
+
+If
+.I flags
+specifies
.BR MPOL_F_ADDR ,
then information is returned about the policy governing the memory
address given in
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html
Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
