lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH 2/3 linux-next] cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking
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@semaphore.gr>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
index 1e3be56..08be431 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
@@ -92,12 +92,8 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load)
return;
dbs_info->down_skip = 0;

- /*
- * The optimal frequency is the frequency that is the lowest that can
- * support the current CPU usage without triggering the up policy. To be
- * safe, we focus 10 points under the threshold.
- */
- if (load < (cs_tuners.down_threshold - 10)) {
+ /* Check for frequency decrease */
+ if (load < cs_tuners.down_threshold) {
freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100;

dbs_info->requested_freq -= freq_target;
--
1.8.1.4


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-05 23:21    [W:0.152 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site