[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched: Move numa_balancing sysctls to its own file
Hi Luis and Andrew,

As the c6833e10008f ("memory tiering: rate limit NUMA migration

has been merged into linux v6.1-rc1, there is no conflict about this
patch, could

anyone help to pick it up, thanks.

On 2022/9/10 3:44, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 11:37:41AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> On 2022/9/9 9:46, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>> On 2022/9/9 8:06, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 03:25:31PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>>>> The sysctl_numa_balancing_promote_rate_limit and sysctl_numa_balancing
>>>>> are part of sched, move them to its own file.
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <>
>>>> There is quite a bit of random cleanup on each kernel release
>>>> for sysctls to do things like what you just did. Because of this it
>>>> has its
>>>> own tree to help avoid conflicts. Can you base your patches on the
>>>> sysctl-testing branch here and re-submit:
>>> Found this when reading memory tiering code,sure to re-submit based
>>> your branch,
>>> thanks.
>> Hi Luis,the numa_balancing_promote_rate_limit_MBps from commit 1db91dd846e0
>> “memory tiering: rate limit NUMA migration throughput”only on
>> linux-next(from mm repo),
>> 1)only send sysctl_numa_balancing changes based on your branch
>> or
>> 2)queued this patch from mm repo if no objection, Cc'ed Andrew
>> Which one do your like, or other options, thanks.
> 2) as that would give more testing to the new code as well. We can deal
> with merge conflicts on my tree later.
> Luis
> .

 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-21 04:10    [W:0.158 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site