From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat May 31 17:43:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA25573 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 May 1997 17:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.210.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA25568 for ; Sat, 31 May 1997 17:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (tom@localhost) by misery.sdf.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA05366; Sat, 31 May 1997 17:41:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: misery.sdf.com: tom owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 17:41:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Samplonius To: Terry Lambert cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: LINT and GENERIC - between a rock and a generic place. In-Reply-To: <199705312249.PAA11870@phaeton.artisoft.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, 31 May 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > > On Sat, 31 May 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > > > More and more people are trying to use GENERIC as a template for their > > > own kernels and they're losing, of course, because generic sets many > > > limits (like max children or open files) too low. > > > > Now that we have login.conf this is pretty much a dead issue isn't it? > > Why heavily customize the kernel config file, when you can do it with > > login.conf? In fact the stock login.conf already has a "news" class for > > news server. > > Jordan is speaking to hard limits. The login.conf speaks to soft > limits, and is still limited to what it can set by the hard limits. Well, login.conf does allow you set hard and soft limits, at least in the language of setrlimit() > The hard limits are the result of static allocations, general at > initialization time before the kernel is really running, like > globally declared arrays. The only two things I can think of is the maximum number of open files, and mbufs clusters. Why can't these be handled like setting device setttings (IRQs, baseports, etc)? Boot with a "-c" to change them, before the kernel is really running, and then write the changes into kernel after boot with dset. > AIX was probably right when it made all this stuff dynamic. Then you > could at least sysctl the "hard limit" after the machine was up. I guess there is performance penalty? > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. Tom