On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:27:36 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mi...@elte.hu> wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijls...@chello.nl> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 11:36 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > Do people enable CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG? > > > > Well, I have it always enabled, but I've honestly no idea if that makes > > me weird. > > > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=n, CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG=y is getting to be a pretty > > > small subset? > > > > Could be, do you fancy me doing a sysctl? shouldn't be hard. > > i dunno, why another fancy sysctl for something that fits quite nicely > into the existing sched_features scheme that we've been using for such > purposes for the past 3-4 kernel releases? > > we always provided various toggles for new scheduler features via > /sys/debug/sched_features, so that people can do performance regression > testing, and it works quite well. > If we know that this control will be reliably available in packaged kernels then fine. But how to we arrange for that? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
