| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20070122115638.835b26a1.akpm@osdl.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:56:38 -0800 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> To: Nadia.Derbey@...l.net Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nadia.Derbey@...l.net Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] automatic tuning applied to some kernel components > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:15:22 +0100 Nadia.Derbey@...l.net wrote: > The following kernel components register a tunable structure and call the > auto-tuning routine: > . file system > . shared memory (per namespace) > . semaphore (per namespace) > . message queues (per namespace) This is the part of the patch series which really matters, and I just don't understand it :( Why do we want to autotune these things? What problem is this patch series solving? Please describe this part of the work much, much more completely, so we can understand the need to add such a large amount of code to the kernel. It seems strange that the whole feature is Kconfigurable. Please also explain the thinking behind that. I suspect the patches would be much simpler if you simply required that all these new tunables be of type `long'. About seven eighths of the code would go away. As would most of those eye-popping macros. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists