Message-Id: <200410061927.i96JRU607630@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@osdl.org>, "Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: <mingo@redhat.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Default cache_hot_time value back to 10ms
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 12:27:44 -0700
Thread-Index: AcSrYGGe/eUC0tBtSvSByCX71PqbLAAeDhwA
In-Reply-To: <20041005215116.3b0bd028.akpm@osdl.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1155
Lines: 28

Andrew Morton wrote on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 9:51 PM
> > Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >  I'd say it is probably too low level to be a useful tunable (although
> >  for testing I guess so... but then you could have *lots* of parameters
> >  tunable).
>
> This tunable caused an 11% performance difference in (I assume) TPCx.
> That's a big deal, and people will want to diddle it.
>
> If one number works optimally for all machines and workloads then fine.
>
> But yes, avoiding a tunable would be nice, but we need a tunable to work
> out whether we can avoid making it tunable ;)
>
> Not that I'm soliciting patches or anything.  I'll duck this one for now.

Andrew, can I safely interpret this response as you are OK with having
cache_hot_time set to 10 ms for now?  And you will merge this change for
2.6.9?  I think Ingo and Nick are both OK with that change as well. Thanks.

- Ken


-
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/