[Question] sched: Should balance

The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

* [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