On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 07:58:40AM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:12:58AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > > A new "fs/proc-stat-irqs-latency-ms" sysctl parameter is now added to > > No. No, no, no, no, no. No. > > Stop adding new sysctls for this kind of thing. It's just a way to shift > blame from us (who allegedly know what we're doing) to the sysadmin > (who probably has better things to be doing than keeping up with the > intricacies of development of every single piece of software running on > their system). > > Let's figure out what this _should_ be. Yeah, let's start interrogating about which values specifically this super sekret applications wants. I assume CPU stats, so system call which returns CPU statistics in binary form. > Why are you caching the _output_ of calling sprintf(), rather than caching the > values of each interrupt? For output caching string is better, but I'm not defending the patch.
