RE: [PATCH] sched/fair: Correct misleading comment in task_numa_migrate()

[Jianyong Wu]

Hi Peter, Rik, and maintainers,

Gentle ping on this small comment fix patch.

It was reviewed by Rik about 3 weeks ago and got a " Reviewed-by" [1]. Since then there has been no further comments. I just wonder if there are any other concerns or if it is ready to be picked up.

The original patch is here:

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250908061923.543081-1-wujianyong@xxxxxxxx/

Thanks for your time.

Best regards,
Jianyong Wu

Jianyong Wu> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2025 12:26 AM
> To: Jianyong Wu <wujianyong@xxxxxxxx>; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx;
> peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx; vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx;
> jianyong.wu@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx; rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx; bsegall@xxxxxxxxxx;
> mgorman@xxxxxxx; vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Correct misleading comment in
> task_numa_migrate()
> 
> On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 14:19 +0800, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> > The current comment implies that both the task and the group must get
> > benefit for a node to be considered. However, the actual code allows a
> > node to pass if *either* the task *or* the group meets the criteria.
> >
> > As established in the previous discussion [1], the code logic is
> > correct.
> > Update the comment to accurately reflect that either condition is
> > sufficient.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu <wujianyong@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> --
> All Rights Reversed.