[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cfd9edbf0801240419t669c9d9cl4cf0f821599fc7ad@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:19:45 +0100
From: "Daniel SpÄng" <daniel.spang@...il.com>
To: "KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Marcelo Tosatti" <marcelo@...ck.org>,
"Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8] mem_notify v5: introduce /dev/mem_notify new device (the core of this patch series)
Hi KOSAKI,
On 1/24/08, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> +#define PROC_WAKEUP_GUARD (10*HZ)
[...]
> + timeout = info->last_proc_notify + PROC_WAKEUP_GUARD;
If only one or a few processes are using the system I think 10 seconds
is a little long time to wait before they get the notification again.
Can we decrease this value? Or make it configurable under /proc? Or
make it lower with fewer users? Something like:
timeout = info->last_proc_notify + min(mem_notify_users, PROC_WAKEUP_GUARD);
Cheers,
Daniel
--
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