On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:59:39AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > In the end I just gave up and kept it simple as there is no benefit to > !PREEMPT_RT which just disables IRQs. Maybe it'll be worth considering when > PREEMPT_RT is upstream and can be enabled. The series was functionally > tested on the PREEMPT_RT tree by reverting the page_alloc.c patch and > applies this series and all of its prerequisites on top.
Right, I see the problem. Fair enough; perhaps ammend the changelog to include some of that so that we can 'remember' in a few months why the code is 'funneh'.
