linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 21/40] autonuma: avoid CFS select_task_rq

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 29 Jun 2012 22:48:55 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, Dan Smith <danms@...ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@...il.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
	Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Don Morris <don.morris@...com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/40] autonuma: avoid CFS select_task_rq_fair to return
 -1


* Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote:

> On 06/29/2012 03:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:57 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>Either this is a scheduler bugfix, in which case you
> >>are better off submitting it separately and reducing
> >>the size of your autonuma patch queue, or this is a
> >>behaviour change in the scheduler that needs better
> >>arguments than a 1-line changelog.
> >
> >I've only said this like 2 or 3 times.. :/
> 
> I'll keep saying it until Andrea has fixed it :)

But that's just wrong - patch submitters *MUST* be responsive 
and forthcoming. Mistakes are OK, but this goes well beyond 
that. A patch-queue must generally not be resubmitted for yet 
another review round, as long as there are yet unaddressed 
review feedback items.

The thing is, core kernel code maintainers like PeterZ don't 
scale and the number of patches to review is huge - yet Andrea 
keeps wasting Peter's time with the same things again and 
again... How much is too much?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/