Re: [PATCH] sched: Move numa_balancing sysctls to its own file

[Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>]

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.

>>
>> If testing goes fine, then I'd move this to sysctl-next which linux-next
>> picks up for yet more testing.
>>
>> Are scheduling folks OK with this patch and me picking it up on the
>> sysctl-next tree if all tests are a go?
>>
>>    Luis
>> .