Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 09:21:34 -0800 From: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, scottl@netflix.com, kbowling@llnw.com, gallatin@netflix.com Subject: Re: small patch for numactl. Comments? Message-ID: <20171114172134.GD6265@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: <20171114171032.ez6pxk3yrlczplvi@mguzik> References: <20171114020138.GA18863@mcvoy.com> <20171114171032.ez6pxk3yrlczplvi@mguzik>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 06:10:34PM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > > I'm wacking LMbench to be numa aware and this patch would help me make > > sure that when you are a numa machine you could insist that people > > run the benchmark via numactl (imma gonna blog about numa, it sucks > > unless you are numa aware). > > > > Well, I think the right thing to do is to query the existing policy and > complain when it turns out nothing is set. Perhaps exit by default and > add a switch to proceed anyway. As already stated, that means #ifdef-ing portable code. Not a fan of that. I believe someone already approved env var approach anyway.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171114172134.GD6265>