Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751237AbXBMKLF (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 05:11:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751239AbXBMKLF (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 05:11:05 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:37884 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751237AbXBMKLE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 05:11:04 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Nadia Derbey Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] automatic tuning applied to some kernel components References: <20070116061516.899460000@bull.net> <20070116063030.761795000@bull.net> <20070122115638.835b26a1.akpm@osdl.org> <45B61E50.6020607@bull.net> <45CC68BA.4010403@bull.net> <45D17F8D.3020207@bull.net> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 03:10:36 -0700 In-Reply-To: <45D17F8D.3020207@bull.net> (Nadia Derbey's message of "Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:06:21 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1409 Lines: 33 Nadia Derbey writes: > So, should I understand from this that automatic tuning and the AKT framework > itself would make sense, given that I find the rigth tunables it should be > applied to? Sort of. The concept of things tuning themselves automatically makes a lot of sense. I'm not at all certain about tunables being exported just to be hidden again. Ideally you don't even want the fact that these things are varying visible to the user. So I think that if you can find a good example that cannot be solved better another way, you can build a case for your framework. Currently I am doubt you can find such a case. > Actually, dont' know if you had the opportunity to read all the patches, but > there are 2 other tunables AKT is proposed to be applied to: > . max_threads, the tunable limit on nr_threads > . max_files, the tunable limit on nr_files At a quick glance max_threads and max_files appear even more to be DOS limits and not tunables and even less applicable to needing any tuning at all. My gut feel is at worst these values may need a little better boot time defaults but otherwise they the should be good. Eric - 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/