From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A702E6B0100 for ; Wed, 13 May 2009 09:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 15:08:11 +0200 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: do we really want to export more pdflush details in sysctls Message-ID: <20090513130811.GE4140@kernel.dk> References: <20090513130128.GA10382@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090513130128.GA10382@lst.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Peter W Morreale , torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, May 13 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi all, > > commit fafd688e4c0c34da0f3de909881117d374e4c7af titled > "mm: add /proc controls for pdflush threads" adds two more sysctl > variables exposing details about pdflush threads. At the same time > Jens Axboe is working on the per-bdi writeback patchset which will > hopefull soon get rid of the pdflush threads in their current form. > > Is it really a good idea to expose more details now or should we revert > this patch before 2.6.30 is out? Pained me as well when updating the patchset. I see little value in these knobs as it is, I'm imagining that the submitter must have had a use case where it made some difference? -- Jens Axboe -- 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-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org