Re: [PATCH V5 0/2] load_balance() fixes for affinity

[Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>]

On 6/20/2017 8:28 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 6/13/2017 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>> On 6/7/2017 1:18 PM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>>> Co-authored-by: Austin Christ <austinwc@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
>>>
>>> [V5]
>>> -updated comment to explain the "why" behind the redo check
>>> -fixed panic triggered from active_load_balance_cpu_stop()
>>>
>>> [V4]
>>> -restricted active cpus mask to the domain span
>>> -fixed dst_cpu masking logic to work for the entire local group
>>>
>>> [V3]
>>> -fixed botched subject lines
>>>
>>> [V2]
>>> -Corrected use of Signed-off-by tags
>>> -Removed temp cpumask variable from stack
>>>
>>> Jeffrey Hugo (2):
>>>    sched/fair: Fix load_balance() affinity redo path
>>>    sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance()
>>>
>>>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
>>>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> Peter (and/or Ingo?), is this series likely to make 4.13?  V5 has been 
>> quiet, so I'm not sure if folks are happy with things, or just haven't 
>> had time to review.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
> 
> Ping?
> 

Ping again.

Since there has been no comments for the past 3 weeks, I'm assuming 
everyone is happy with this series.  With 4.12-rc7 out, and Linus saying 
it looks good, it seems likely that the merge window is going to open 
next week.  We really want this in 4.13.

Would you please confirm that the series will be pulled into 4.13?

-- 
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies as an affiliate of Qualcomm 
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.