From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Borntraeger Subject: Re: [PATCH cgroup/for-4.5-fixes] cpuset: make mm migration asynchronous Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:45:49 +0100 Message-ID: <56A24EAD.1010507@de.ibm.com> References: <56978452.6010606@de.ibm.com> <20160114195630.GA3520@mtj.duckdns.org> <5698A023.9070703@de.ibm.com> <20160115164023.GH3520@mtj.duckdns.org> <20160119171841.GP3520@mtj.duckdns.org> <56A23BA8.1040403@de.ibm.com> <20160122152232.GB32380@htj.duckdns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160122152232.GB32380-piEFEHQLUPpN0TnZuCh8vA@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Tejun Heo Cc: Li Zefan , Johannes Weiner , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-s390 , KVM list , Oleg Nesterov , Peter Zijlstra , "Paul E. McKenney" , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kernel-team-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org On 01/22/2016 04:22 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Christian. > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 03:24:40PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> Hmmm I just realized that this patch slightly differs from the one that >> I tested. Do we need a retest? > > It should be fine but I'd appreciate if you can test it again. I did restart the test after I wrote the mail. The latest version from this mail thread is still fine as far as I can tell. Thanks Christian