linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/31] Foundation for automatic NUMA balancing V2

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]

Message-ID: <50A31971.6000706@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:09:21 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/31] Foundation for automatic NUMA balancing V2

On 11/13/2012 12:27 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de> wrote:
>
>>> I'd also like to add another, structural side note: you
>>> mixed new vm-stats bits into the whole queue, needlessly
>>> blowing up the size and the mm/ specific portions of the
>>> tree. I'd suggest to post and keep those bits separately,
>>> preferably on top of what we have already once it has
>>> settled down. I'm keeping the 'perf bench numa' bits
>>> separate as well.
>>
>> The stats part are fairly late in the queue. I noticed they
>> break build for !CONFIG_BALANCE_NUMA but it was trivially
>> resolved. [...]
>
> Ok - the vm-stats bits are the last larger item remaining that
> I've seen - could you please redo any of your changes on top of
> the latest tip:numa/core tree, to make them easier for me to
> pick up?
 >
> Your tree is slowly becoming a rebase of tip:numa/core and that
> will certainly cause problems.

Mel's tree looks like the easiest of the two to merge
from an mm/ point of view.

> I'll backmerge any delta patches and rebase as necessary - but
> please do them as deltas on top of tip:numa/core to make things
> reviewable and easier to merge:
>
>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git numa/core
>
> Thanks!
>
> 	Ingo
>


-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/