From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:19:24 +0200 From: Ingo Oeser Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.4-ac10 Message-ID: <20010518201924.M754@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from mikeg@wen-online.de on Fri, May 18, 2001 at 07:45:15PM +0200 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mike Galbraith Cc: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 07:45:15PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Yes, ~exactly! I chose 30 tasks because they almost do (tool/userland > dependant.. must recalibrate often) fit. The bitch is to get the vm > to automagically detect the rss/cache munch tradeoff point without all > the manual help. What about a sysctl for that? Choose decent steps and let 0 (which is an insane value) mean "let's kernel decide" and make this default. In the past we could do this by adjusting some watermarks in /proc/sys/vm but now, we can't do anything but trust the genius kernel developers. I doubt that we can test all kinds of workload and even imagine what pervert stuff some people do with their machines. Tuning _is_ manual work. Always has been and always will be. This countinously "I know it better then you" is what I hated about Windows and now this comes more and more into Linux :-( Rik: Would you take patches for such a tradeoff sysctl? Regards Ingo Oeser -- To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/