On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 03:56:59PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.p...@lge.com wrote:
> > From: Byungchul Park
>
> Hello,
>
> This patch was rejected and the next version having tried to apply what
> peterz recommanded, was almost ignored last
On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.p...@lge.com wrote:
> From: Byungchul Park
Hello,
This patch was rejected and the next version having tried to apply what
peterz recommanded, was almost ignored last year. But now, exactly same
thing is already in the tree which was posted by T
On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 01:27:46PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.p...@lge.com wrote:
> > From: Byungchul Park
> >
> > account_numa_dequeue and manipulating se->group_node are meaningful only on
> > SMP
>
> Clearly the data element exists for
On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 06:43:31PM +0900, byungchul.p...@lge.com wrote:
> From: Byungchul Park
>
> account_numa_dequeue and manipulating se->group_node are meaningful only on
> SMP
Clearly the data element exists for !SMP and you didn't fix that.
Also, try and do this without adding more #ifdef
From: Byungchul Park
account_numa_dequeue and manipulating se->group_node are meaningful only on SMP
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park
---
kernel/sched/fair.c |4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 09456fc..93b8de6
5 matches
Mail list logo
