From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] scheduler changes for v5.5
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:20:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d2312678-f3a1-9e22-0c95-2a161cd67bd7@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191125150811.GA116487@gmail.com>
On 25/11/2019 15:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> We can give testers a linearized tree for testing, should this come up
> (which I doubt it will ...), ok?
>
My worry (and I think Mel's) is on performance bisection of the mainline
tree (not specifically on the load balancer rework), by LKP or else. It's
not something I personally do (nor expect to do in the foreseeable future),
so Mel is much better positioned than I to argue for/against this.
Still, I was under the impression that not introducing (scheduler)
regressions in the git history was valuable. If I'm misguided, feel free to
ignore.
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-25 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-25 12:59 Ingo Molnar
2019-11-25 13:49 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-11-25 15:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-25 16:20 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2019-11-25 16:34 ` Mel Gorman
2019-11-25 16:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-11-25 16:50 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-11-26 23:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-11-27 1:30 ` pr-tracker-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d2312678-f3a1-9e22-0c95-2a161cd67bd7@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®