Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:25:01 -0400 | From | Kevin Radloff <> | Subject | Logic bug in 2.6.12 conservative cpufreq governor? |
| |
The conservative cpufreq governor's "ignore_nice" sysfs parameter is reversed from what I would expect:
% cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/conservative/ignore_nice 1
.. While it's not ignoring nice'd processes. Changing it to 0 causes it to ignore them. That would seem to make sense only if it's supposed to mean "ignore niceness of processes" vs "ignore nice'd processes"... Is that so?
If it is, then wouldn't the name make more sense as "ignore_niceness" or something equally less ambiguous? :)
Please CC me as I'm not on the list.
-- Kevin 'radsaq' Radloff radsaq@gmail.com http://saqataq.us/ - 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/
| |