[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171221102530.all2hqoyh77mffmf@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 11:25:30 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 02:45:02PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 20-12-17, 16:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > The below makes more sense to me too; hmm?
> >
> > @@ -335,12 +335,11 @@ static unsigned int sugov_next_freq_shar
> >
> > j_max = j_sg_cpu->max;
> > j_util = sugov_aggregate_util(j_sg_cpu);
> > + sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &util, &max);
This should 'obviously' have been:
sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &j_util, *j_max);
> > if (j_util * max > j_max * util) {
> > util = j_util;
> > max = j_max;
> > }
> > -
> > - sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &util, &max);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists