linux-kernel - Re: [Question] sched: Should balance

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1326300264.2442.162.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:44:24 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Question] sched: Should balance_iterator be removed?

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.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/