lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 6/9] add a loop counter based timeout mechanism
>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at  5:06 PM, in message
<20080225220601.GH2659@elf.ucw.cz>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
>
> I believe you have _way_ too many config variables. If this can be set
> at runtime, does it need a config option, too?

Generally speaking, I think until this algorithm has an adaptive-timeout in addition to an adaptive-spin/sleep, these .config based defaults are a good idea. Sometimes setting these things at runtime are a PITA when you are talking about embedded systems that might not have/want a nice userspace sysctl-config infrastructure. And changing the defaults in the code is unattractive for some users. I don't think its a big deal either way, so if people hate the config options, they should go. But I thought I would throw this use-case out there to ponder.

Regards,
-Greg



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-26 16:19    [W:0.080 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site