Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753308Ab3CFGtw (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 01:49:52 -0500 Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.219.53]:45963 "EHLO mail-oa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750753Ab3CFGtv (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 01:49:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51366C70.3020406@semaphore.gr> References: <51366C70.3020406@semaphore.gr> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 14:49:50 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 linux-next] cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking From: Viresh Kumar To: Stratos Karafotis Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 800 Lines: 19 On 6 March 2013 06:06, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > 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 > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 8 ++------ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Acked-by: Viresh Kumar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/