Re: [GIT PULL] scheduler updates for v5.18

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi, Ingo,
> 
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> >> 
> >> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 6:13 AM Qian Cai <quic_qiancai@quicinc.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:54:09AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> > > > Huang Ying (3):
> >> > > >       sched/numa-balancing: Move some document to make it consistent with the code
> >> > > >       sched/numa: Fix NUMA topology for systems with CPU-less nodes
> >> > > >       sched/numa: Avoid migrating task to CPU-less node
> >> > >
> >> > > Linus, I don't think you want to merge this as-is. This will introduce a
> >> > > kernel crash on arm64 NUMA as mentioned in this thread,
> >> > 
> >> > Ok, dropped from my queue. Thanks,
> >> 
> >> I've reverted the broken commit & will send another pull request after 
> >> some testing. Sorry about that!
> >
> > Ended up using the fix below instead - it's tested already on the affected 
> > system.
> >
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help!
> 
> Is it a general rule to send a fixing patch for the bug of a patch
> merged by tip tree?  Or a new version of the patch is acceptable too?

Depends on how recently it got merged. This one was merged a few weeks ago, 
and the fix patch is simple enough, so I went for that approach.

Thanks,

	Ingo