From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed?
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:44:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1326300264.2442.162.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADZ9YHgCc3T1oPJ717+=2CGODqz715qCzwvEobh8yBur4E80Eg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2012-01-11 at 22:10 +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Commit 4a55bd5e97b1775913 (sched: fair-group: de-couple load-balancing
> from the rb-trees) added balance_iterator in cfs_rq. But, no real use
> in current code. Shouldn't it be removed? Or has it been kept for
> future use?
Nope its dead wood, thanks for spotting it.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-11 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-11 16:10 [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed? Rakib Mullick
2012-01-11 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1326300264.2442.162.camel@twins \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rakib.mullick@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox