Re: [patch 3/4] mempolicy: add MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES flag

[Paul Jackson]

> 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?

By my calculation, all but the last line is correct.

We use zero-based numbering, so relative node '1' is the
'second' node, and the 'second' node in allowed nodes 4-10
is node 5, not 4.  Similarly for relative nodes '3' and '5'.

So that last line should be:

> 	1,3,5			4-10		5,7,9


-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.940.382.4214
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/