On 08/29/2017 02:36 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:45:07AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> +CC linux-api >> >> On 08/28/2017 02:28 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 09:56:10AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>> >>> Seems reasonable. However, if there is a user who checks >>> sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio entry for HIGHMEM and change it, suggested >>> interface will cause a problem since it doesn't expose ratio for >>> HIGHMEM. Am I missing something? >> >> As you explained, it makes little sense to change it for HIGHMEM which >> only affects MOVABLE allocations. Also I doubt there are many systems >> with both HIGHMEM (implies 32bit) *and* MOVABLE (implies NUMA, memory >> hotplug...) zones. So I would just remove it, and if somebody will >> really miss it, we can always add it back. In any case, please CC >> linux-api on the next version. > > If we will accept a change that potentially breaks the user, I think > that making zero as a special value for sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio > is better solution. How about this way? I'd prefer removal, but won't object to zero. Certainly much better than UINT_MAX. > Thanks. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
