[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <001a01d1e234$e33ce290$a9b6a7b0$@net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 20:14:53 -0700
From: "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
To: "'Srinivas Pandruvada'" <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
"'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Linux PM list'" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] intel_pstate: Update cpu_frequency tracepoint every time
On 2016.07.19 15:10 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-07-19 at 15:10 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>>
>> Currently, intel_pstate only updates the cpu_frequency tracepoint
>> if the new P-state to set is different from the current one, but
>> that causes powertop to report 100% idle on an 100% loaded system
>> sometimes.
>>
>> Prevent that from happening by updating the cpu_frequency tracepoint
>> every time intel_pstate_update_pstate() is called.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>
> Acked-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>-
Shouldn't this patch refer to:
commit fdfdb2b1301670a69195ba1e5666df4a7f02eb46
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Date: Fri Mar 18 23:20:02 2016 +0100
intel_pstate: Do not call wrmsrl_on_cpu() with disabled interrupts
which is the patch that introduced the regression?
... Doug
Powered by blists - more mailing lists