On 10/10/2017 07:31 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 10-10-17 07:29:31, Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 10/09/2017 10:49 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> Anyway I still stand by my position that this sounds over-engineered and >>> a simple 0/1 resp. on/off interface would be both simpler and safer. If >>> anybody wants an auto mode it can be added later (as a value 2 resp. >>> auto). >> >> 0/1 with the default set to the strict, slower mode? > > yes, keep the current semantic and allow users who care to disable > something that stands in the way. But, let's be honest, this leaves us with an option that nobody is ever going to turn on. IOW, nobody except a very small portion of our users will ever see any benefit from this.
