Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:09:27 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: Move numa_balancing sysctls to its own file | From | Kefeng Wang <> |
| |
Hi Luis and Andrew,
As the c6833e10008f ("memory tiering: rate limit NUMA migration throughput"),
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 <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> >>>> 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. >>> >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mcgrof/linux.git/log/?h=sysctl-testing >>>> >> 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 > .
|  |