[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 13:58:01 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Rex-BC Chen <rex-bc.chen@...iatek.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Avoid unnecessary frequency updates due to
mismatch
On 05-05-22, 10:21, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Part of your problem is that cpufreq use khz whereas clock uses hz
Not in this case at least as the value mentioned in OPP table DT is in
Hz.
> Would it be better to do something like below in cpufreq_generic_get
>
> (clk_get_rate(policy->clk) + 500) / 1000
>
> so you round to closest instead of always floor rounding
That would be a fine thing to do anyway, though I am not sure if it
will fix the problem at hand.
If the hardware returns 499,999,499 Hz, we will still have the
problem.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists