On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Paul Jackson wrote:
> No and yes. The manner in which too many nodes (as requested in a
> RELATIVE mask) are folded into too small a cpuset is not actually
> that critical, so long as it doesn't come up empty. However, what
> I'll be recommending, in a follow-up patch, will be folding the
> larger set into the smaller one modulo the size of the smaller one.
>
So basically the "relative" nodemask that is passed with
MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES is wrapped around the allowed nodes?
relative nodemask mems_allowed result
1,3,5 4 4
1,3,5 4-6 4-6
1,3,5 4-8 4-5,7
1,3,5 4-10 4,6,8
Is that correct?
David
--
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/
