On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 11:37:41AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > 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@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > 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. 2) as that would give more testing to the new code as well. We can deal with merge conflicts on my tree later. Luis
