Re: 2.5.67-mm4 & IRQ balancing

[Andrew Morton]

Bill Davidsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > - Can build irqbalanced into the intial initramfs image as part of kernel
> >   build. (lacking klibc, we would need to statically link against glibc)
> 
> Why, please? Unless you postulate that (a) the default kernel balance
> would be so bad the machine wouldn't boot, or (b) that the interface would
> be done only once at boot time, there's no reason for the user program to
> be in initramfs, is there? Let the distribution put it where other system
> things like ifconfig live.

Mainly as an exercise in using the initramfs infrastructure for something
real.  It's doubtful that irqbalanced would be started that way in real life.