From: Mike F. <va...@ge...> - 2013-04-29 00:08:22
|
On Saturday 27 April 2013 02:34:49 Zhouping Liu wrote: > From: "Mike Frysinger" <va...@ge...> > > On Saturday 27 April 2013 00:23:14 Zhouping Liu wrote: > > > sub-cpuset cgroup only contains CPUs or memory in one node, but > > > > only contains -> to only contain > > why 'contain', I think it should be 'contains', isn't it? when you add the "to", it changes to "contain" > > > that's not permitted in the special machine. The patch fixed it. > > > > what is a "special machine" ? > > the special machine is that it has such nodes(describe above), > in which there's only CPUs or memory. > > how about this: > > "that's not permitted in the such above special machine." i would use: that's not permitted in the scenario described above. > > > + tst_resm(TINFO, "None CPUs in the node%ld", nd); > > > > i think you mean "no" instead of "None" > > > > > + tst_resm(TINFO, "Only use CPU0 in the cpuset cgroup " > > > + "for the special scenario"); > > > > what is "the special scenario" ? > > the special scenario is "no CPUs in the node%ld", I think it's clear in log > message. when you say "Only use", that's a command to the user. i think you meant to say "Only using". i think the two messages can be combined into one then: tst_resm(TINFO, "No CPUs in node%ld; using only CPU0", nd); > > > mount_mem("cpuset", "cpuset", NULL, CPATH, CPATH_NEW); > > > > > > - if (is_numa(cleanup) > 0) > > > - /* For NUMA system, using the first node for cpuset.mems */ > > > - write_cpusets(get_a_numa_node(cleanup)); > > > - else > > > - /* For nonNUMA system, using node0 for cpuset.mems */ > > > - write_cpusets(0); > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Not any nodes contain memory, so using get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS) > > > > "Not any" -> "No" > > it's not that meaning, what I meant here is that there's not any nodes > contain memory in a NUMA system, Some nodes contain memory, but some nodes > don't. ok, so i think you want to say instead: Some nodes do not contain memory, .... -mike |