Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:26:24 +0000 (GMT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency |
| |
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Rik van Riel wrote: > > keeping CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU may be a good idea after all.
Do you mean, keeping the CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU codepath even when CONFIG_SWAP=n is a good idea? Or do you see a reason we actually still need CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU as an option?
It does add about 2.6k to kernel text (YMMV), is saving that worth the extra config option? For others to vote, really.
Hugh
| |