Re: [PATCH 05/13] sched/balancing: Rename load_balance() => sched_balance_rq()

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 3/8/24 4:48 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Standardize scheduler load-balancing function names on the
> > sched_balance_() prefix.
> > 
> > Also load_balance() has become somewhat of a misnomer: historically
> > it was the first and primary load-balancing function that was called,
> > but with the introduction of sched domains, it's become a lower
> > layer function that balances runqueues.
> > 
> > Rename it to sched_balance_rq() accordingly.
> 
> nit: Can this be sched_balance_rqs()? since load balancing happens 
> between two runqeueus.

Yeah, but we really are primarily balancing *this* runqueue - because it 
got potentially out of balance due to a newidle event, or we are checking 
its balance in the periodic load-balancing tick. So it's really a shortcut 
for 'balance this runqueue' - singular, although internally it will indeed 
search for a source runqueue to move tasks from.

So it's a kind of a pull-balancing model, with a singular target (this_cpu).

> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
> > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> > ---
> 
> Though one would have been familiar with names(for someone started recently),
> given the correct behaviour and historical context helps why the name changes are making sense. 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>

Thanks! I've added your Reviewed-by tags to the series.

	Ingo