Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 10:11:14 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why is TUNABLE_INT discouraged? Message-ID: <8662zkurx9.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikU6fLzWL-n6fCtvaTsXWGis7ydKM1qJaV=WRJ%2B@mail.gmail.com> (Garrett Cooper's message of "Sun, 8 Aug 2010 02:31:44 -0700") References: <AANLkTinKaiGFhKRgqQ%2BFjm=02VfWCxULe0a68y-PkJx6@mail.gmail.com> <86fwyq8rsc.fsf@ds4.des.no> <i3kbis$73l$1@dough.gmane.org> <86d3tujh72.fsf@ds4.des.no> <AANLkTi=puD%2B-WeZ%2BFGdtZtw1v%2BNnGD_htwNa%2BEn9fcML@mail.gmail.com> <864of680wv.fsf@ds4.des.no> <AANLkTinraF50O%2Bcp_h1m6TODnoz_7R3WXfjTanh-86mn@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikU6fLzWL-n6fCtvaTsXWGis7ydKM1qJaV=WRJ%2B@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> writes: > Why would someone express a tunable in a memory address (not being > sarcastic... I just don't see why it makes sense right now, but if > there's a valid reason I'm more than happy to be educated :)..)? A few examples: hw.acpi.host_mem_start hw.pci.host_mem_start hw.physmemstart The following are not addresses, but can be > 32 bits on 64-bit machines and even on some 32-bit machines using PAE / PTE: hw.physmem vm.kmem_size vm.kmem_size_max vm.kmem_size_min It might be a good idea to introduce TUNABLE_POINTER and TUNABLE_SIZE. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8662zkurx9.fsf>