On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 09:09 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 08:20 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On 09/23/2013 11:28 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > <formletter> > > > > > > This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the > > > stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt > > > for how to do this properly. > > > > > > </formletter> > > Fixing stable will be interesting: > > Starting with 3.10, changes were introduced that have improved the > > scalability by something like factor 100. > > (factor 100 for sysv sem for calls that do not sleep on a 8 socket, > > 64-way Intel system) > > > > Unfortunately, we are still fixing bugs - and the changes are > > definitively not trivial. > > > > Thus the next long-term kernel must either go backward to the 3.9 code > > or forward - hopefully all bugs will be fixed until the release of 3.12. > > As soon as I finish some maintenance, I'll wedge the "or forward" pile > into 3.10-rt and beat it up on 8 socket box. Applied ipc v3.10... plus pending fixes (minus sem_otime/proc), and beat is up with ltp, rt-tests/foo and benchmark mixes. No hiccups. -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html