On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <200106161359.f5GDxQ214335@ns.caldera.de> you write:
> > In article <m15BG8K-001UIwC@mozart> you wrote:
> > > # Up...
> > > echo 1 > /proc/sys/cpu/1
> >
> > Wouldn't /proc/sys/cpu/<num>/enable be better? This way other per-cpu
> > sysctls could be added more easily...
>
> Yep. But rewrite the sysctl crap first to make dynamically adding and
> deleting entries sane.
I had, actually. 2.5 stuff, but as soon as fs/super.c merge gets into the
sane area I'll see what can be safely merged into 2.4. Sorry - it touches
quite a few places and running two splitups in parallel... <shudder> As
soon as this fscking roll of barbwire^W^W^Wset of locking changes gets
untangled...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 23 2001 - 21:00:17 EST