Re: [PATCH] sched: Move numa_balancing sysctls to its own file

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 05:06:03PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 03:25:31PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > The sysctl_numa_balancing_promote_rate_limit and sysctl_numa_balancing
> > are part of sched, move them to its own file.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> There is quite a bit of random cleanup on each kernel release
> for sysctls to do things like what you just did. Because of this it has its
> own tree to help avoid conflicts. Can you base your patches on the
> sysctl-testing branch here and re-submit:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mcgrof/linux.git/log/?h=sysctl-testing
> 
> If testing goes fine, then I'd move this to sysctl-next which linux-next
> picks up for yet more testing.
> 
> Are scheduling folks OK with this patch and me picking it up on the
> sysctl-next tree if all tests are a go?

Yeah, think so, it just moves stuff around a bit.

ACK.