From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755509AbXKARHs (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:07:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752750AbXKARHj (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:07:39 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:50927 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752451AbXKARHi (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:07:38 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:07:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Paul Jackson cc: rientjes@google.com, Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de Subject: Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice In-Reply-To: <20071101090612.e0c86ddb.pj@sgi.com> Message-ID: References: <20071031061729.18174.60384.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com> <20071031131949.b91bf383.pj@sgi.com> <20071031214719.81f8293a.pj@sgi.com> <20071031233352.959c32d0.pj@sgi.com> <20071101090612.e0c86ddb.pj@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Jackson wrote: > > > Forcing coders to specify the same detail in multiple places, when > > > there is no way to validate their consistency, doesn't force them > > > to think or do it right. It increases the error rate due to > > > > There are always wrappers for system calls. The flags will be set in > > these. > > We were discussing libnuma here, not glibc. The system call wrappers > are in glibc. System call wrappers should not be setting optional > flags. They should just make the system call -- do whatever magic it > takes to get the provided arguments into the right registers or other > conventionally determined places, and invoke the necessary machine > instruction to trap into the kernel. The library interface can set flags to modify behavior.