From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC GIT PULL] scheduler fix for autogroups
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 22:44:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121201214438.GA6544@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx_yJbonbEC5AYteyNv+qWbG-H=yj_=YaiJHwKyu4FH3Q@mail.gmail.com>
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Please [RFC] pull the latest sched-urgent-for-linus git tree
> > from:
>
> No. That patch is braindead. I wouldn't pull it even if it
> wasn't this late.
>
> Why the hell leave a read-only 'sched_autogroup_enabled' proc
> file?
>
> What the f*ck is the point? It looks like the flag still
> exists (we test it), but now there's no point to it, since you
> can't change it.
>
> What am I missing?
You are not missing anything. That flag is my fault not Mike's:
I booted the initial version of that patch but was unsure
whether autogroups was enabled - it's a pretty transparent
feature. So I figured that having that flag (but readonly) would
give us this information definitely.
So I suggested to Mike to keep that flag so that user-space is
informed that autogroups is enabled. It seemed like a cute
usability twist at that time, and there's existing precedent for
it in /proc, but now I'm not so sure anymore...
Should we use some other file for that - or no file at all and
just emit a bootup printk for kernel hackers with a short
attention span?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-01 21:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-01 11:16 Ingo Molnar
2012-12-01 21:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-01 21:44 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-12-01 21:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-12-01 22:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-02 7:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-02 8:21 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-02 19:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-12-02 19:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-03 5:25 ` [patch] " Mike Galbraith
2012-12-03 5:36 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121201214438.GA6544@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome