On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 16:53 -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:38:43 -0700 (PDT) > > David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Andrew, Lee, what's the status of this patchset? > > > > All forgotten about as far as I'm concerned. It was v1, it had "rfc" > > in there and had an "Ick, no, please don't do that" from Greg. I > > assume Greg's OK with the fixed-up version. > > > > > > I think Greg's concerns were addressed in the latest revision of the > patchset, specifically http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=124906676520398. > > Maybe the more appropriate question to ask is if Mel has any concerns > about adding the per-node hstate attributes either as a substitution or as > a complement to the mempolicy-based allocation approach. Mel? > > Lee, do you have plans to resend the patchset including the modified kobj > handling? Yes. I had planned to ping you and Mel, as I hadn't heard back from you about the combined interfaces. I think they mesh fairly well, and the per node attributes have the, perhaps desirable, property of ignoring any current task mempolicy. But, I know that some folks don't like a proliferation of ways to do something. I'll package up the series [I need to update the Documentation for the per node attributes] and send it out as soon as I can get to it. This week, I'm pretty sure. Lee -- 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
