Re: [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency

[Hugh Dickins]

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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/