lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Rewording language in mbind(2) to "threads" not "processes"
From
Date
On 10/25/2016 05:40 PM, Piotr Kwapulinski wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I spent a couple of hours trying to review your patch. Unfortunately
> nowadays I spend no more than an hour per day for whole my linux
> kernel activity. It may take longer time for me to review it.
> This patch touches some areas of the kernel I'm still not an expert of
> (though I'm learning a lot). I'll review (and possibly fix) it ASAP.

Okay, Piotr, Thanks. If you do eventually have some input, that would
be great, but I understand you are time constrained.

Cheers,

Michael


> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:38:33AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Christoph, Piotr, and Brice
>>
>> Since you (Christoph and Piotr) helped with documenting MPOL_LOCAL
>> just recently, I wonder if I might ask you to review a patch that I
>> propose for the mbind(2) manual page.
>>
>> As far as I understand, memory policy, as set by set_mempolicy(2)
>> is a per-thread attribute. The set_mempolicy(2) and get_mempolicy(2)
>> pages already reflect this, thanks to a patch from Brice last year.
>>
>> However, such changes were not made in the mbind(2) page.
>> I wonder if I could ask you (and Brice, and anyone who's willing)
>> to look at the patch that I propose below to remedy this. (There are
>> a couple questions "???" that I've injected in the patch.) Is it okay?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/man2/mbind.2 b/man2/mbind.2
>> index a5f26e2..9494854 100644
>> --- a/man2/mbind.2
>> +++ b/man2/mbind.2
>> @@ -75,16 +75,16 @@ page in the kernel containing all zeros.
>> For a file mapped with
>> .BR MAP_PRIVATE ,
>> an initial read access will allocate pages according to the
>> -process policy of the process that causes the page to be allocated.
>> -This may not be the process that called
>> +memory policy of the thread that causes the page to be allocated.
>> +This may not be the thread that called
>> .BR mbind ().
>>
>> The specified policy will be ignored for any
>> .B MAP_SHARED
>> mappings in the specified memory range.
>> -Rather the pages will be allocated according to the process policy
>> -of the process that caused the page to be allocated.
>> -Again, this may not be the process that called
>> +Rather the pages will be allocated according to the memory policy
>> +of the thread that caused the page to be allocated.
>> +Again, this may not be the thread that called
>> .BR mbind ().
>>
>> If the specified memory range includes a shared memory region
>> @@ -100,7 +100,10 @@ If, however, the shared memory region was created with the
>> .B SHM_HUGETLB
>> flag,
>> the huge pages will be allocated according to the policy specified
>> -only if the page allocation is caused by the process that calls
>> +only if the page allocation is caused by the thread that calls
>> +.\"
>> +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "process" to "thread" in the preceding line?
>> +.\"
>> .BR mbind ()
>> for that region.
>>
>> @@ -146,15 +149,15 @@ A nonempty
>> specifies physical node IDs.
>> Linux does not remap the
>> .I nodemask
>> -when the process moves to a different cpuset context,
>> -nor when the set of nodes allowed by the process's
>> +when the thread moves to a different cpuset context,
>> +nor when the set of nodes allowed by the thread's
>> current cpuset context changes.
>> .TP
>> .BR MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES " (since Linux-2.6.26)"
>> A nonempty
>> .I nodemask
>> specifies node IDs that are relative to the set of
>> -node IDs allowed by the process's current cpuset.
>> +node IDs allowed by the thread's current cpuset.
>> .PP
>> .I nodemask
>> points to a bit mask of nodes containing up to
>> @@ -178,7 +181,7 @@ argument is ignored.
>> Where a
>> .I nodemask
>> is required, it must contain at least one node that is on-line,
>> -allowed by the process's current cpuset context
>> +allowed by the thread's current cpuset context
>> (unless the
>> .B MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES
>> mode flag is specified),
>> @@ -194,10 +197,10 @@ mode requests that any nondefault policy be removed,
>> restoring default behavior.
>> When applied to a range of memory via
>> .BR mbind (),
>> -this means to use the process policy,
>> +this means to use the thread memory policy,
>> which may have been set with
>> .BR set_mempolicy (2).
>> -If the mode of the process policy is also
>> +If the mode of the thread memory policy is also
>> .BR MPOL_DEFAULT ,
>> the system-wide default policy will be used.
>> The system-wide default policy allocates
>> @@ -268,13 +271,13 @@ If the "local node" is low on free memory,
>> the kernel will try to allocate memory from other nodes.
>> The kernel will allocate memory from the "local node"
>> whenever memory for this node is available.
>> -If the "local node" is not allowed by the process's current cpuset context,
>> +If the "local node" is not allowed by the thread's current cpuset context,
>> the kernel will try to allocate memory from other nodes.
>> The kernel will allocate memory from the "local node" whenever
>> -it becomes allowed by the process's current cpuset context.
>> +it becomes allowed by the thread's current cpuset context.
>> By contrast,
>> .B MPOL_DEFAULT
>> -reverts to the policy of the process (which may be set via
>> +reverts to the memory policy of the thread (which may be set via
>> .BR set_mempolicy (2));
>> that policy may be something other than "local allocation".
>> .PP
>> @@ -300,7 +303,10 @@ is specified in
>> .IR flags ,
>> then the kernel will attempt to move all the existing pages
>> in the memory range so that they follow the policy.
>> -Pages that are shared with other processes will not be moved.
>> +Pages that are shared with other threads will not be moved.
>> +.\"
>> +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "processes" to "threads" in the preceding line?
>> +.\"
>> If
>> .B MPOL_MF_STRICT
>> is also specified, then the call will fail with the error
>> @@ -312,8 +318,11 @@ If
>> is passed in
>> .IR flags ,
>> then the kernel will attempt to move all existing pages in the memory range
>> -regardless of whether other processes use the pages.
>> -The calling process must be privileged
>> +regardless of whether other threads use the pages.
>> +.\"
>> +.\" ??? Is it correct to change "processes" to "threads" in the preceding line?
>> +.\"
>> +The calling thread must be privileged
>> .RB ( CAP_SYS_NICE )
>> to use this flag.
>> If
>> @@ -383,7 +392,7 @@ specifies one or more node IDs that are
>> greater than the maximum supported node ID.
>> Or, none of the node IDs specified by
>> .I nodemask
>> -are on-line and allowed by the process's current cpuset context,
>> +are on-line and allowed by the thread's current cpuset context,
>> or none of the specified nodes contain memory.
>> Or, the
>> .I mode
>> @@ -440,14 +449,14 @@ When
>> .B MPOL_DEFAULT
>> is specified for
>> .BR set_mempolicy (2),
>> -the process's policy reverts to system default policy
>> +the thread's memory policy reverts to the system default policy
>> or local allocation.
>> When
>> .B MPOL_DEFAULT
>> is specified for a range of memory using
>> .BR mbind (),
>> any pages subsequently allocated for that range will use
>> -the process's policy, as set by
>> +the thread's memory policy, as set by
>> .BR set_mempolicy (2).
>> This effectively removes the explicit policy from the
>> specified range, "falling back" to a possibly nondefault
>>
>> --
>> Michael Kerrisk
>> Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
>> Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
>


--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-31 13:00    [W:0.078 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site