[PATCH 6.6 026/283] cpuidle: menu: Cleanup after loadavg removal

Sasha Levin
2026-02-28T18:07:31Z

From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>

[ Upstream commit bf183113842b0fcf4b6f977a97fa9cf8e2b21625 ]

The performance impact of loadavg was removed with commit a7fe5190c03f
("cpuidle: menu: Remove get_loadavg() from the performance multiplier")
With only iowait remaining the description can be simplified, remove
also the no longer needed includes.

Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Stable-dep-of: 80606f4eb8d7 ("cpuidle: governors: menu: Always check timers with tick stopped")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c | 17 +++++------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
index 27010eee6d1bc..864a7be7ba485 100644
--- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
@@ -14,8 +14,6 @@
#include <linux/ktime.h>
#include <linux/hrtimer.h>
#include <linux/tick.h>
-#include <linux/sched.h>
-#include <linux/sched/loadavg.h>
#include <linux/sched/stat.h>
#include <linux/math64.h>

@@ -94,16 +92,11 @@
* state, and thus the less likely a busy CPU will hit such a deep
* C state.
*
- * Two factors are used in determing this multiplier:
- * a value of 10 is added for each point of "per cpu load average" we have.
- * a value of 5 points is added for each process that is waiting for
- * IO on this CPU.
- * (these values are experimentally determined)
- *
- * The load average factor gives a longer term (few seconds) input to the
- * decision, while the iowait value gives a cpu local instantanious input.
- * The iowait factor may look low, but realize that this is also already
- * represented in the system load average.
+ * Currently there is only one value determining the factor:
+ * 10 points are added for each process that is waiting for IO on this CPU.
+ * (This value was experimentally determined.)
+ * Utilization is no longer a factor as it was shown that it never contributed
+ * significantly to the performance multiplier in the first place.
*
*/

--
2.51.0