Hello, Viresh. On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:50:04AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 10 April 2013 00:00, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:00:59PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT > >> +static bool wq_power_efficient = 0; > >> +module_param_named(power_efficient, wq_power_efficient, bool, 0444); > >> +#endif > > > > I don't think we need to make the whole thing configurable. Turning > > it off isn't gonna save much - my gut tells me it's gonna be four > > instructions. :) > > > > What I meant was that the default value for the parameter would > > probably be need to be configurable so that mobile people don't have > > to include the kernel param all the time or patch the kernel > > themselves. > > I didn't get it completely.. Are you asking to set the default value > to 1 instead > to keep it enabled by default if config option is selected? Oh, sorry about that. I meant something like this. #ifdef CONFIG_WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_BY_DEFAULT // or something prettier static bool wq_power_efficient = true; #else static bool wq_power_efficient = false; #endif module_param.... And its Kconfig entry config WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_BY_DEFAULT bool "Blah Blah Viresh is awesome" default n Thanks! -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
