[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140512200140.GA10676@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 04:01:40 +0800
From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
Cc: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@...el.com>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Doug Smythies <dsmythies@...us.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Change the calculation of
next pstate
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:59:42AM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/05/2014 10:34 μμ, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:30:03PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> >> On 09/05/2014 05:56 μμ, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> >>
> >> Next performance state = min_perf + (max_perf - min_perf) * load / 100
> >>
> > Hi,
> >
> > This formula is fundamentally broken. You need to associate the load with its
> > frequency.
>
> Could you please explain why is it broken? I think the load should be
> independent from the current frequency.
Why independent? The load not (somewhat) determined by that?
--
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