static int's for proc_change_penalty and tlb_flush_penalty

[James Manning]

[ Thursday, January 20, 2000 ] Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I am not sure if it worth to have the cacheline penality in 2.4.x
> consdiering I don't like by-hand settings, and that the scheduler
> algorithm should have the best values as default.

I'm hoping that with testing over a large number of SMP systems (dual
celeries -> 8-way 2MB xeon's at least) that there's enough effective
overlap to make this possible... if the "best" values for a given accepted
workload vary largely enough over a range of machines, we could pick the
"least damage" value and possible have a CONFIG_ option for "Tunable
SMP scheduling"?  Or would that still be a poor choice for 2.4.x?

James
-- 
Miscellaneous Engineer --- IBM Netfinity Performance Development

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo en vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/