[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150420180107.GE24936@home.goodmis.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:01:07 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT RFC PULL rcu/urgent] Prevent Kconfig from asking pointless
questions
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:09:03AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> The sysfs knob might be nice, but as far as I know nobody has been
> complaining about it.
>
> Besides, we already have the rcutree.kthread_prio= kernel-boot parameter.
> So how about if the Kconfig parameter selects either SCHED_OTHER
> (the default) or SCHED_FIFO:1, and then the boot parameter can be used
> to select other values.
>
> That said, if the lack of a sysfs knob has been causing real problems,
> let's make that happen.
But then it's too late, because the time of something getting into the kernel
to the time people can use it can be months if not years.
I see no harm in adding one. Pretty much every kernel parameter I added for
ftrace, has a sysctrl knob for it. (Not a sysfs knob, but a /proc/sys/kernel
knob which is different).
-- Steve
--
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