Re: [rfc][patch] Memory Binding API v0.3 2.5.41

From: Arjan van de Ven (
Date: Thu Oct 10 2002 - 05:06:20 EST

> +/**
> + * sys_mem_setbinding - set the memory binding of a process
> + * @pid: pid of the process
> + * @memblks: new bitmask of memory blocks
> + * @behavior: new behavior
> + */
> +asmlinkage long sys_mem_setbinding(pid_t pid, unsigned long memblks,
> + unsigned int behavior)
> +{

Do you really think exposing low level internals as memory layout / zone
split up to userspace is a good idea ? (and worth it given that the VM
already has a cpu locality preference?)

I'd much rather see the VM have an arch-specified "cost" for getting
memory from not-the-prefered zones than exposing all this stuff to
userspace and depending on userspace to do the right thing.... it's the
kernel's task to abstract the low level details of the hardware after

   Arjan van de Ven

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:36 EST