From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from burns.conectiva (burns.conectiva [10.0.0.4]) by perninha.conectiva.com.br (Postfix) with SMTP id 1AA6A16B8D for ; Fri, 18 May 2001 15:23:04 -0300 (EST) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:23:03 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.4-ac10 In-Reply-To: <20010518201924.M754@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ingo Oeser Cc: Mike Galbraith , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 18 May 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote: > Rik: Would you take patches for such a tradeoff sysctl? "such a tradeoff" ? While this sounds reasonable, I have to point out that up to now nobody has described exactly WHAT tradeoff they'd like to make tunable and why... I'm not against making things tunable, but I would like to at least see the proponents of tunable things explain WHAT they want tunable and exactly WHY. regards, Rik -- Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ -- 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/