* [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates
@ 2016-11-16 19:27 Stratos Karafotis
2016-11-17 3:40 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stratos Karafotis @ 2016-11-16 19:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar; +Cc: linux-pm, LKML
The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong.
Both increase and decrease happen at steps.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
---
-> v2
Remove a trailing space
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
index a48b724..7522ec6 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
@@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners,
* sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80%
* (default), then we try to decrease frequency
*
- * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction
- * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency
+ * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum
+ * frequency
*/
static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates
2016-11-16 19:27 [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates Stratos Karafotis
@ 2016-11-17 3:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-11-24 1:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2016-11-17 3:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stratos Karafotis; +Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-pm, LKML
On 16-11-16, 21:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong.
>
> Both increase and decrease happen at steps.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> ---
> -> v2
> Remove a trailing space
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> index a48b724..7522ec6 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners,
> * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80%
> * (default), then we try to decrease frequency
> *
> - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction
> - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency
> + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum
> + * frequency
> */
> static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates
2016-11-17 3:40 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2016-11-24 1:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2016-11-24 1:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar; +Cc: Stratos Karafotis, linux-pm, LKML
On Thursday, November 17, 2016 09:10:59 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 16-11-16, 21:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> > The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong.
> >
> > Both increase and decrease happen at steps.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> > ---
> > -> v2
> > Remove a trailing space
> >
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > index a48b724..7522ec6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners,
> > * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80%
> > * (default), then we try to decrease frequency
> > *
> > - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction
> > - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency
> > + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum
> > + * frequency
> > */
> > static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > {
>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Applied.
Thanks,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-11-24 1:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-11-16 19:27 [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates Stratos Karafotis
2016-11-17 3:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-11-24 1:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).