> > @@ -2059,22 +2059,18 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
> > struct task_struct *p)
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG
> > +__read_mostly bool sched_numa_balancing;
> > +
> > void set_numabalancing_state(bool enabled)
> > {
> > + sched_numa_balancing = enabled;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG
> > if (enabled)
> > sched_feat_set("NUMA");
> > else
> > sched_feat_set("NO_NUMA");
>
> So why is the 'NUMA' sched_features option still twiddled? Your patch splits
> out a
> sched_numa_balancing flag - so the NUMA/NO_NUMA feature can go away, right?
>
I thought we could retain sched_feat so that we could enable/disable
sched numa balancing for debugging purposes similar to other sched
features if the kernel has been build with CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
