On Tue 10-10-17 07:53:50, Dave Hansen wrote: > 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. But aren't those small groups who would like to squeeze every single cycle out from the page allocator path the targeted audience? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
