linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/13] sched/balancing: Rename load_balance() => sched_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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:47:21 +0530
From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] sched/balancing: Rename load_balance() =>
 sched_balance_rq()



On 3/8/24 4:48 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Standardize scheduler load-balancing function names on the
> sched_balance_() prefix.
> 
> Also load_balance() has become somewhat of a misnomer: historically
> it was the first and primary load-balancing function that was called,
> but with the introduction of sched domains, it's become a lower
> layer function that balances runqueues.
> 
> Rename it to sched_balance_rq() accordingly.

nit: Can this be sched_balance_rqs()? since load balancing happens 
between two runqeueus.


> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>
> Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> ---

Though one would have been familiar with names(for someone started recently),
given the correct behaviour and historical context helps why the name changes are making sense. 

Reviewed-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>