Re: [GIT PULL] scheduler changes for v5.5

[Valentin Schneider]

On 25/11/2019 15:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> We can give testers a linearized tree for testing, should this come up 
> (which I doubt it will ...), ok?
> 

My worry (and I think Mel's) is on performance bisection of the mainline
tree (not specifically on the load balancer rework), by LKP or else. It's
not something I personally do (nor expect to do in the foreseeable future),
so Mel is much better positioned than I to argue for/against this.

Still, I was under the impression that not introducing (scheduler)
regressions in the git history was valuable. If I'm misguided, feel free to
ignore.

> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo
>