> > Are you saying:
> > 1) The kernel continues to default to Choice A, unless
> > the flag enables Choice B, or
> > 2) The kernel defaults to the new Choice B, unless the
> > flag reverts to the old Choice A?
>
> If 2) is keeping the API semantics then 2.
No .. (1) keeps the same API semantics.
> Let everything be as it is today unless
> numactl sets the new.
> ...
> Tough. The API needs to remain stable.
Good - that I understand. Your position is clear now.
You have chosen (1) above, which keeps Choice A as the default.
Before I leave this part, there is one more thing I kinda really need,
if you could, Christoph. Could you describe in your own words what you
think Choices A and B mean? We seem to be having trouble communicating,
and hence there is some risk right now that we don't mean the same thing
by this new "Choice B".
===
Now ... onto the matter of permanent API warts:
> > I wonder if there might be some way to avoid that permanent ugly wart
> > on each and every set/get mempolicy system call forever afterward.
>
> Hmmm.. The alternative is to add new set/get mempolicy functions.
Other alternatives include a per-system, per-cpuset or per-process
flag, in addition to the per-system call flag you suggested earlier
(MPOL_MF_RELATIVE), or whatever you mean by "new set/get mempolicy
functions" ... could you elaborate on that one?
So ... the question becomes this:
How do we migrate to Choice B, without leaving both Choices
permanently supported, and an ugly mode flag selecting the
non-default Choice, while not breaking API's too abruptly?
Thanks.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
