[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18527.41440.273383.388943@frecb006361.adech.frec.bull.fr>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:15:12 +0200
From: Solofo.Ramangalahy@...l.net
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc: Solofo.Ramangalahy@...l.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>,
Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>,
Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC -mm 0/6] sysv ipc: scale msgmnb with the number of cpus
Hi Manfred,
This part is more difficult to answer than the other one:
> The whole configuration can be done from user space, thus I assumed that
> a sysctl.conf value [...] could do the job
Yes, while this is (still) possible, this can become cumbersome with
namespaces, hotplug, ...
> (or in the worst case: a dbus/hal daemon that
> updates /proc/sys/kernel/msgnmb) [...]
This would probably mean one daemon per ipc namespace.
The patches seems lighter.
There has been related discussions regarding kernel
space vs. userspace approach in the threads:
. "Change in default vm_dirty_ratio"
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/18/471
. "[RFC][PATCH 0/6] Automatic kernel tunables (AKT)"
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/16/16
(and probably others)
So it seems there is no consensus in doing it either way: kernel or
user space.
Humm... now this make me think that you did not change the MSGMNB
value when you changed MSGMNI and MSGMAX.
Maybe that was on purpose?
--
solofo
--
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