David Rientjes wrote:You mentioned CONFIG_NUM_RECLAIM_THREADS_PER_CPU and not CONFIG_NUM_RECLAIM_THREADS_PER_NODE. The advantage with syscalls is that even if we get the thing wrong, the system administrator has an alternative. Please look through the existing sysctl's and you'll see what I mean. What is wrong with providing the flexibility that comes with sysctl? We cannot possibly think of all situations and come up with the right answer for a heuristic. Why not come up with a default and let everyone use what works for them? -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL --
| Christoph Lameter | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 005/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingDrivers |
| Pekka Enberg | Re: [bug] mm/slab.c boot crash in -git, "kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:2103!" |
| Glauber de Oliveira Costa | [PATCH 08/79] [PATCH] use identify_boot_cpu |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
