From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264174AbUDGV1R (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2004 17:27:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264198AbUDGV1R (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2004 17:27:17 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:4793 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264174AbUDGV1O (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2004 17:27:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 23:27:12 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: colpatch@us.ibm.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, mbligh@aracnet.com Subject: Re: NUMA API for Linux Message-Id: <20040407232712.2595ac16.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <1081373058.9061.16.camel@arrakis> References: <1081373058.9061.16.camel@arrakis> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 14:24:19 -0700 Matthew Dobson wrote: > I must be missing something here, but did you not include mempolicy.h > and policy.c in these patches? I can't seem to find them anywhere?!? > It's really hard to evaluate your patches if the core of them is > missing! It was in the core patch and also in the last patch I sent Andrew. See ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/ak/numa/* for the full patches > > Andrew already mentioned your mistake on the i386 syscalls which needs > to be fixed. That's already fixed > Also, this snippet of code is in 2 of your patches (#1 and #6) causing > rejects: > > @@ -435,6 +445,8 @@ > > struct page *shmem_nopage(struct vm_area_struct * vma, > unsigned long address, int *type); > +int shmem_set_policy(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mempolicy > *new); > +struct mempolicy *shmem_get_policy(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned > long addr); > struct file *shmem_file_setup(char * name, loff_t size, unsigned long > flags); > void shmem_lock(struct file * file, int lock); > int shmem_zero_setup(struct vm_area_struct *); It didn't reject for me. > Just from the patches you posted, I would really disagree that these are > ready for merging into -mm. Why so? -Andi