linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2009 00:27:02 -0600
From:	"Trenton D. Adams" <trenton.d.adams@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Hua Zhong <hzhong@...il.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> So dynamic tuning is good. But at the same time, having a tuning option is
> _never_ an excuse for not getting the default right in the first place.
> It's just a cop-out to say "hey, the default may be wrong for you, but you
> can always tune it locally with XYZ".

Oh, right, you had mentioned that a few days ago about not liking to
have to tune stuff.  I agree, the kernel should just work, except in
rare cases.  But, with procfs, you could still have the default to
data=writeback, and realtime tuneable.  That is what I meant.

Anyhow, I don't want to take up too much of your time.  I wouldn't
want to know how busy you are. :P  No need to reply. :D
--
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/