Comment # 2 on bug 928542 from
(In reply to Bj�rn Lie from comment #1)
> Moving to gnome since there is nobody on the other side of
> bnc-team-evolution.
> 
> Is this still an issue?

I had to switch to 42.1 meanwhile, so have no idea wrt the current state of
Evolution in Tumbleweed.  42.1 is currently at Evolution 3.16.5 though, and
with this OS/Evolution combination at least, preformatted text does work, as
far as being able to send a patch goes.

It's useless for patch review though, see below.  Note how it inserts '>'
characters all over the place the instant you use preformatted to restore the
displayed patch to the state it was sent in, ie to undo the line wrapping that
'normal' does.

--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -7249,12 +7249,19 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_
>  > 	> 	>  * This cpu is idle. If the busiest group is not overloaded
>  > 	> 	>  * and there is no imbalance between this and busiest group
>  > 	> 	>  * wrt idle cpus, it is balanced. The imbalance becomes
> -> 	> 	>  * significant if the diff is greater than 1 otherwise we
> -> 	> 	>  * might end up to just move the imbalance on another group
> +> 	> 	>  * significant if the diff is greater than 1 for most CPUs,
> +> 	> 	>  * or 2 for older CPUs having multiple groups of 2 cores
> +> 	> 	>  * sharing an L2, otherwise we may end up uselessly moving
> +> 	> 	>  * the imbalance to another group, or starting a tug of war
> +> 	> 	>  * with idle L2 groups constantly ripping communicating
> +> 	> 	>  * tasks apart, and no L3 to mitigate the cache miss pain.
>  > 	> 	>  */
> -> 	> 	> if ((busiest->group_type != group_overloaded) &&
> -> 	> 	> 	> 	> (local->idle_cpus <= (busiest->idle_cpus + 1)))
> -> 	> 	> 	> goto out_balanced;
> +> 	> 	> if (busiest->group_type != group_overloaded) {
> +> 	> 	> 	> int imbalance = __this_cpu_read(sd_llc_size) == 2 ? 2 : 1;
> +
> +> 	> 	> 	> if (local->idle_cpus <= busiest->idle_cpus + imbalance)
> +> 	> 	> 	> 	> goto out_balanced;
> +> 	> 	> }
>  > 	> } else {
>  > 	> 	> /*
>  > 	> 	>  * In the CPU_NEWLY_IDLE, CPU_NOT_IDLE cases, use


You are receiving this mail because: