On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 07:56:38PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: > Hi Vincent (and all CCed), I'm sorry to ping about such "old" patch, but > we experienced a similar condition to what this patch addresses; it's an > older kernel (4.15.x) but when suggesting the users to move to an > updated 5.4.x kernel, we noticed that this patch is not there, although > similar ones are (like [0] and [1]). > > So, I'd like to ask if there's any particular reason to not backport > this fix to stable kernels, specially the longterm 5.4. The main reason > behind the question is that the code is very complex for non-experienced > scheduler developers, and I'm afraid in suggesting such backport to 5.4 > and introduce complex-to-debug issues. > > Let me know your thoughts Vincent (and all CCed), thanks in advance. > Cheers, > > > Guilherme > > > P.S. For those that deleted this thread from the email client, here's a > link: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ > > > [0] > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=fe61468b2cb > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ > <- great thread BTW!
'sched/fair: Fix unthrottle_cfs_rq() for leaf_cfs_rq list" failed to apply to 5.4-stable tree' You could check above. But I do not have the link about this. Can't search it on LKML web: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ BTW: '[email protected]' and '[email protected]' all is myself. Sorry for the confusing.. Thanks.
