[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpo=aofVQGe3KMOqXpb67i627pH3sgBhFqwgxHR3pP3TBqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 14:49:50 +0800
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 linux-next] cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in
frequency decrease checking
On 6 March 2013 06:06, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr> wrote:
> When we evaluate the CPU load for frequency decrease we have to compare
> the load against down_threshold. There is no need to subtract 10 points
> from down_threshold.
>
> Instead, we have to use the default down_threshold or user's selection
> unmodified.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 8 ++------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists