Hi, On 05/05/23 09:31, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 10:17:41AM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote: > > On 04/05/23 08:25, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 09:22:22AM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote: > > > > > > > Dietmar Eggemann (2): > > > > sched/deadline: Create DL BW alloc, free & check overflow interface > > > > cgroup/cpuset: Free DL BW in case can_attach() fails > > > > > > > > Juri Lelli (4): > > > > cgroup/cpuset: Rename functions dealing with DEADLINE accounting > > > > sched/cpuset: Bring back cpuset_mutex > > > > sched/cpuset: Keep track of SCHED_DEADLINE task in cpusets > > > > cgroup/cpuset: Iterate only if DEADLINE tasks are present > > > > > > > > include/linux/cpuset.h | 12 +- > > > > include/linux/sched.h | 4 +- > > > > kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 4 + > > > > kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 242 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > > > kernel/sched/core.c | 41 +++---- > > > > kernel/sched/deadline.c | 67 ++++++++--- > > > > kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 +- > > > > 7 files changed, 244 insertions(+), 128 deletions(-) > > > > > > Aside from a few niggles, these look fine to me. Who were you expecting > > > to merge these, tj or me? > > > > Thanks for reviewing! > > > > Not entirely sure, it's kind of split, but maybe the cgroup changes are > > predominant (cpuset_mutex is probably contributing the most). So, maybe > > tj? Assuming this looks good to him as well of course. :) > > Yeah, they all look sane to me and both Waiman and Peter seem okay with > them. If you post an updated version with the minor suggestions applied, > I'll route the series through the cgroup tree. Thanks for reviewing and eventually taking care of the series. v3 just posted (20230508075854.17215-1-juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx). Best, Juri
