On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 15:33 +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote: >> 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? > > 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? > > Sounds fine. > >> >> 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. > > Yes, I missed this. Sorry. No problem. Okay -- I applied this, with the changes I suggested, for man-pages-3.07. Cheers, Michael >> 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
