Hello, Viresh.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:50:04AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10 April 2013 00:00, Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:00:59PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT
> >> +static bool wq_power_efficient = 0;
> >> +module_param_named(power_efficient, wq_power_efficient, bool, 0444);
> >> +#endif
> >
> > I don't think we need to make the whole thing configurable. Turning
> > it off isn't gonna save much - my gut tells me it's gonna be four
> > instructions. :)
> >
> > What I meant was that the default value for the parameter would
> > probably be need to be configurable so that mobile people don't have
> > to include the kernel param all the time or patch the kernel
> > themselves.
>
> I didn't get it completely.. Are you asking to set the default value
> to 1 instead
> to keep it enabled by default if config option is selected?
Oh, sorry about that. I meant something like this.
#ifdef CONFIG_WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_BY_DEFAULT // or something prettier
static bool wq_power_efficient = true;
#else
static bool wq_power_efficient = false;
#endif
module_param....
And its Kconfig entry
config WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_BY_DEFAULT
bool "Blah Blah Viresh is awesome"
default n
Thanks!
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
