| Message ID | 4986155b-de07-1a4c-186c-71d90b12e75c@semaphore.gr (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | Rafael Wysocki |
| Headers | show |
On 16-11-16, 21:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong. > > Both increase and decrease happen at steps. > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> > --- > -> v2 > Remove a trailing space > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > index a48b724..7522ec6 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners, > * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80% > * (default), then we try to decrease frequency > * > - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction > - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency > + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum > + * frequency > */ > static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > { Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
On Thursday, November 17, 2016 09:10:59 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 16-11-16, 21:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > > The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong. > > > > Both increase and decrease happen at steps. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> > > --- > > -> v2 > > Remove a trailing space > > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > > index a48b724..7522ec6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > > @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners, > > * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80% > > * (default), then we try to decrease frequency > > * > > - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction > > - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency > > + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum > > + * frequency > > */ > > static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > > { > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Applied. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c index a48b724..7522ec6 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners, * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80% * (default), then we try to decrease frequency * - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum + * frequency */ static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) {
The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong. Both increase and decrease happen at steps. Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> --- -> v2 Remove a trailing space drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)