Hi,jon. It seems that the maintainers of process scheduler are not interested in reviewing document patches. Could you please review this? Thanks, Tang On 2022/1/10 20:38, Tang Yizhou wrote: > Friendly ping. > Any feedback? > > On 2021/12/21 11:18, Tang Yizhou wrote: >> According to the function prototype of rebalance_domains(), its first >> parameter is *rq* and the document need to be updated. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tang Yizhou <tangyizhou@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst | 8 ++++---- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst >> index 84dcdcd2911c..e57ad28301bd 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst >> @@ -37,10 +37,10 @@ rebalancing event for the current runqueue has arrived. The actual load >> balancing workhorse, run_rebalance_domains()->rebalance_domains(), is then run >> in softirq context (SCHED_SOFTIRQ). >> >> -The latter function takes two arguments: the current CPU and whether it was idle >> -at the time the scheduler_tick() happened and iterates over all sched domains >> -our CPU is on, starting from its base domain and going up the ->parent chain. >> -While doing that, it checks to see if the current domain has exhausted its >> +The latter function takes two arguments: the runqueue of current CPU and whether >> +the CPU was idle at the time the scheduler_tick() happened and iterates over all >> +sched domains our CPU is on, starting from its base domain and going up the ->parent >> +chain. While doing that, it checks to see if the current domain has exhausted its >> rebalance interval. If so, it runs load_balance() on that domain. It then checks >> the parent sched_domain (if it exists), and the parent of the parent and so >> forth. >>
