sched, cgroup: Optimize load_balance_fair()

Use for_each_leaf_cfs_rq() instead of list_for_each_entry_rcu(), this
achieves that load_balance_fair() only iterates those task_groups that
actually have tasks on busiest, and that we iterate bottom-up, trying to
move light groups before the heavier ones.

No idea if it will actually work out to be beneficial in practice, does
anybody have a cgroup workload that might show a difference one way or
the other?

[ Also move update_h_load to sched_fair.c, loosing #ifdef-ery ]

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Reviewed-by: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1310557009.2586.28.camel@twins
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 32 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index b0e7ad796d3b..474f341d6f91 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -1568,38 +1568,6 @@ static unsigned long cpu_avg_load_per_task(int cpu)
         return rq->avg_load_per_task;
 }
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
-
-/*
- * Compute the cpu's hierarchical load factor for each task group.
- * This needs to be done in a top-down fashion because the load of a child
- * group is a fraction of its parents load.
- */
-static int tg_load_down(struct task_group *tg, void *data)
-{
-        unsigned long load;
-        long cpu = (long)data;
-
-        if (!tg->parent) {
-                load = cpu_rq(cpu)->load.weight;
-        } else {
-                load = tg->parent->cfs_rq[cpu]->h_load;
-                load *= tg->se[cpu]->load.weight;
-                load /= tg->parent->cfs_rq[cpu]->load.weight + 1;
-        }
-
-        tg->cfs_rq[cpu]->h_load = load;
-
-        return 0;
-}
-
-static void update_h_load(long cpu)
-{
-        walk_tg_tree(tg_load_down, tg_nop, (void *)cpu);
-}
-
-#endif
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
 
 static void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2);