Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261693AbTICJYV (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 05:24:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261719AbTICJYV (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 05:24:21 -0400 Received: from mx0.gmx.net ([213.165.64.100]:11035 "HELO mx0.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261693AbTICJYO (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 05:24:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 11:24:13 +0200 (MEST) From: Daniel Blueman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: pdflush question... X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Authenticated-Sender: #0008973862@gmx.net X-Authenticated-IP: [194.202.174.101] Message-ID: <14227.1062581053@www37.gmx.net> X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 1.6 (Global Message Exchange) X-Flags: 0001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 935 Lines: 24 Is it worth having a kernel config option to vary the number of 'pdflush' kernel threads? For embedded, systems with no swap and maybe uniproc (?), perhaps one pdflush kthread would do? Perhaps more generally, the number could be linked to the number of processors and/or swap devices or spindles- this would eliminate having to configure it, and improve downward and upward scaling, perhaps? -- Daniel J Blueman COMPUTERBILD 15/03: Premium-e-mail-Dienste im Test -------------------------------------------------- 1. GMX TopMail - Platz 1 und Testsieger! 2. GMX ProMail - Platz 2 und Preis-Qualit?tssieger! 3. Arcor - 4. web.de - 5. T-Online - 6. freenet.de - 7. daybyday - 8. e-Post - 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/