* [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed?
@ 2012-01-11 16:10 Rakib Mullick
2012-01-11 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Rakib Mullick @ 2012-01-11 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar, Peter Zijlstra; +Cc: LKML
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?
Thanks,
Rakib
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed?
2012-01-11 16:10 [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed? Rakib Mullick
@ 2012-01-11 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2012-01-11 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rakib Mullick; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML
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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-01-11 16:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-01-11 16:10 [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed? Rakib Mullick
2012-01-11 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox