This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add environment variable tuning for elision parameters.
- From: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- To: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Andi Kleen <ak at linux dot jf dot intel dot com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:22:29 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add environment variable tuning for elision parameters.
- References: <1371232449-12102-1-git-send-email-andi at firstfloor dot org> <1371232449-12102-3-git-send-email-andi at firstfloor dot org> <1371481072 dot 16968 dot 21017 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <20130617175838 dot GI6123 at two dot firstfloor dot org> <1371494680 dot 16968 dot 21555 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <20130617211701 dot GJ6123 at two dot firstfloor dot org>
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 23:17 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Is there a reason to prefer "none" over something
> > more descriptive (eg, "no_elision") beyond your personal preference?
>
> All the existing scripts and all the existing documentation use "none".
Why is that of relevance when considering the bigger picture of glibc
needing to provide well-designed and clear interfaces? I assume that
the user base you have now is very small compared to the user base we'll
get if we put this in upstream glibc, right? Or how many users do you
have currently? Also, glibc doesn't have any elision docs right now, so
which docs are you referring to?