On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That was done intentional at some point to handle cpusets. > numactl 1.0 or so didn't have that problem. I'll happily admit to not being an expert here :) However, I thought that the concept of cpusets was that if you attempted to set affinity outside of your cpuset, that would silently fail. I assume that the reason that libnuma didn't want to set outside of it's own affinity mask is to avoid such a silent failure? Also, I question the Real World(TM) prevalence of cpusets. > However it's unclear if it's really bug. Not sure if I'd call it a bug since it was intentional, but sure would call it an unexpected change in behavior :) -- 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
