On 10/29/2018 04:38 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2018, Waiman Long wrote: > >> BTW, since you are making stat2 compatible with stat, will that be >> easier from the user API perspective if we use a sysctl parameter to >> turn on and off IRQs reporting for /proc/stat, for example? > > For one /proc/stat is also common for debugging envs (ie: performance) > and I fear that if a tunnable modifies the behavior of the output, we > it might never be usable again (at least not without having users also > now consider the systctl parameter). Making it dynamic I think is not > worth it. > > Thanks, > Davidlohr This is just a matter if it is easier for users to modify their code to use /proc/stat2 or turning on a sysctl parameter. Again, this will certainly depend on the circumstances. Cheers, Longman
