On Tue 31-03-20 09:42:46, Vlastimil Babka wrote: [...] > > Should we not do this, we'll have to live with the consequences of > > supporting the full swoop of sysctls are boot params, whatever > > consequences those may be. > > Of course when the first user tries to set some particular sysctl as boot param > and finds and reports it doesn't work as intended, then it can be fixed or > blacklisted and it can't break anyone else? Absolutely agreed. I would be really careful to not overengineer this whole thing. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
