Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio

[Andrew Morton]

Robert Love wrote:
> 
> I actually have a 2.5.52 patch out which
> is a bit cleaner - it removes the defines completely and uses the new
> variables.

I actually don't mind the

#define TUNABLE (tunable)

thing, because when you look at the code, it tells you that
TUNABLE is "special".  Not a local variable, not a formal arg,
not (really) a global variable.  It aids comprehension.

Prefixing all the names with "tune_" would suit, too.