On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:44:01PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:21:18PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > This is a second round of performance-related backports based on low-hanging > > fruit in the 4.13 merge window based on 4.12.2. > > > > As before, these have only been tested on 4.12-stable. While they may > > merge against older kernels, I have no data on how it behaves and cannot > > guarantee it's a good idea so I don't recommend it. There will also be > > some major conflicts that are not trivial to resolve. > > > > For most of the tests I conducted, the impact is marginal but patches the > > first two sets of patches are important for large machines and for uses > > of nohz_full. The load balancing patch is fairly specific but measurable. > > The removal of unnecessary IRQ disabling/enabling is borderline in terms of > > performance but they are trivial patches and avoiding unnecessary expensive > > operations is always a plus. > > > > With 4.12.3, the patches 1-17 can be dropped. Really? Why, what happened in .3 that make the need for those 17 patches just "go away"? > The main commit left over > that is missing from this series was "sched/topology: Fix overlapping > sched_group_capacity" which is relatively minor in impact. The rest were > to bring the schedulers more or less in line so debugging problems in > 4.12-stable would be easier to compare with mainline and to make the 4.12 > scheduler easier to understand. > > The rest of the series should apply ok on top of 4.12.3 if you'd like to > pick it up. So just patches 18-26? thanks, greg k-h