Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #82333 > unrolled thread

Bug#1070083: linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

Contents

  Bug#1070083: linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024? Alex Volkov <alex@bootes.sytes.net> - 2024-04-29 23:40 +0200
    Bug#1070083: linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024? Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2024-04-30 12:50 +0200
    Bug#1070083: marked as done (linux: Do we still need  sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024?) "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2024-06-28 00:20 +0200

#82333 — Bug#1070083: linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024?

Source: linux
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

I can't see why something which can be done with a kernel boot parameter or a
sysctl variable
needs to be forced in the source since 2011. Also, the very existence of this
new default is non-transparent for anyone relying on official kernel
documentation. Is it even mentioned in any README or something? Because I
couldn't find anything.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 12.5
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (991, 'stable-updates'), (991, 'stable-security'), (991, 'stable'), (99, 'testing'), (90, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 6.6.13-bootes0-p-1000 (SMP w/16 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_DK.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_DK.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en_US
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#82335

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 02:10:20AM +0500, Alex Volkov wrote:
> Source: linux
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> I can't see why something which can be done with a kernel boot parameter or a
> sysctl variable
> needs to be forced in the source since 2011. Also, the very existence of this
> new default is non-transparent for anyone relying on official kernel
> documentation. Is it even mentioned in any README or something? Because I
> couldn't find anything.

It was set as such a long time ago when we enabled the option:

https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/commit/25e71bd23902b424ec9457244db24faad8b4359f

I suspect the idea was to make it possible for users to use this new
feature, but only as a opt-in, while it was still very fresh.

Maybe Ben remembers.

But I guess we could drop the Debian specific patch.

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82861 — Bug#1070083: marked as done (linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024?)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Your message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2024 22:10:11 +0000
with message-id <E1sMxJj-000sYt-FM@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#1070083: fixed in linux 6.9.7-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1070083,
regarding linux: Do we still need sched-autogroup-disabled.patch in 2024?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1070083: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1070083
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web