Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
Thanks in advance,
Guilherme
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:56 AM Guilherme G. Piccoli gpiccoli@canonical.com wrote:
Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
Thanks in advance,
Guilherme
Forgot to mention the original thread link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20200525172709.GB7427@vingu-book/#t
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
An ack from Peter...
On 11/20/20 12:27 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
An ack from Peter...
Hey Peter,
Any concerns with this patch getting merged? We are seeing it in production, looks like, so would be good to get it into stable.
Nivedita
Hey Sasha, sorry to annoy again, but maybe Peter is very busy - wouldn't be possible maybe to get that merged after a review from Ben or Ingo? I see them in the MAINTAINERS file, specially Ben as CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH maintainer.
I understand the confidence in this patch is relatively high, since it's a backport from the author, right?
Let me know your thoughts, and thanks all in advance! Cheers,
Guilherme
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 12:03:18PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hey Sasha, sorry to annoy again, but maybe Peter is very busy - wouldn't be possible maybe to get that merged after a review from Ben or Ingo? I see them in the MAINTAINERS file, specially Ben as CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH maintainer.
I understand the confidence in this patch is relatively high, since it's a backport from the author, right?
I still want to see an ack from the maintainer please.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 08:49, Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 12:03:18PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hey Sasha, sorry to annoy again, but maybe Peter is very busy - wouldn't be possible maybe to get that merged after a review from Ben or Ingo? I see them in the MAINTAINERS file, specially Ben as CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH maintainer.
I understand the confidence in this patch is relatively high, since it's a backport from the author, right?
I still want to see an ack from the maintainer please.
SCHEDULER M: Ingo Molnar mingo@redhat.com M: Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org M: Juri Lelli juri.lelli@redhat.com (SCHED_DEADLINE) M: Vincent Guittot vincent.guittot@linaro.org (SCHED_NORMAL) R: Dietmar Eggemann dietmar.eggemann@arm.com (SCHED_NORMAL) R: Steven Rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org (SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR) R: Ben Segall bsegall@google.com (CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH) R: Mel Gorman mgorman@suse.de (CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING) L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core S: Maintained F: kernel/sched/ F: include/linux/sched.h F: include/uapi/linux/sched.h F: include/linux/wait.h F: include/linux/preempt.h
Isn't me and Ben enough in this case ?
thanks,
greg k-h
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 09:21:19AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 08:49, Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 12:03:18PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hey Sasha, sorry to annoy again, but maybe Peter is very busy - wouldn't be possible maybe to get that merged after a review from Ben or Ingo? I see them in the MAINTAINERS file, specially Ben as CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH maintainer.
I understand the confidence in this patch is relatively high, since it's a backport from the author, right?
I still want to see an ack from the maintainer please.
SCHEDULER
M: Vincent Guittot vincent.guittot@linaro.org (SCHED_NORMAL)
Vincent is also the one that knows that leaf code best, he did the backport, you're not going to get better than that.
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 10:44:28AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 09:21:19AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 08:49, Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 12:03:18PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hey Sasha, sorry to annoy again, but maybe Peter is very busy - wouldn't be possible maybe to get that merged after a review from Ben or Ingo? I see them in the MAINTAINERS file, specially Ben as CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH maintainer.
I understand the confidence in this patch is relatively high, since it's a backport from the author, right?
I still want to see an ack from the maintainer please.
SCHEDULER
M: Vincent Guittot vincent.guittot@linaro.org (SCHED_NORMAL)
Vincent is also the one that knows that leaf code best, he did the backport, you're not going to get better than that.
So I've asked for someone else to review this because the backport is somehat different from the upstream commit. Ideally we want these types of backports to be peer reviewed, just like any other commit that lands upstream.
If the sched folks feel good about that backport (as indicated above...) I'll happily merge it in.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
The backport doesn't apply to the tree. How did you test this?
thanks,
greg k-h
On 12/6/20 3:27 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
Hi Sasha / Peter, is there anything blocking this backport from Vincent to get merged in 5.4.y?
The backport doesn't apply to the tree. How did you test this?
thanks,
greg k-h
Thanks, Greg, Vincent, for sorting this out and committing to stable upstream..
sched/fair: Fix unthrottle_cfs_rq() for leaf_cfs_rq list commit 294de8933adbdda78acaa3935971d26bb6de745e
I don't have a reproducer but we'll be testing this to the extent we can beat up on it...
Nivedita
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org