Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265563AbTFRWEw (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2003 18:04:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265564AbTFRWEw (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2003 18:04:52 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:35089 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265563AbTFRWEv (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2003 18:04:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 00:18:49 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: davidm@hpl.hp.com Cc: Andi Kleen , David Mosberger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: add /proc/sys/kernel/cache_decay_ticks Message-ID: <20030618221849.GD3543@wotan.suse.de> References: <200306182151.h5ILpMcx022062@napali.hpl.hp.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <16112.58330.522570.329438@napali.hpl.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16112.58330.522570.329438@napali.hpl.hp.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 566 Lines: 14 > I don't see why the two have to be tied together. I agree it would be > _nice_, but having /proc/sys/kernel/cache_decay_ticks in it's current > form is much better than nothing at all. The problem is that when you change it later with the sysctl you have a subtle user visible change, breaking existing users. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/