Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:19:21 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
Cc:     rjw@rjwysocki.net, joel@joelfernandes.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don't set next_freq to
 UINT_MAX"
Message-ID: <20190722064921.qrjslrdnbknd5j7b@vireshk-i7>
References: <1563431200-3042-1-git-send-email-dsmythies@telus.net>
 <20190718102815.utl3hanfc7fpf2i6@vireshk-i7>
 <000001d53d7f$ee306e70$ca914b50$@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <000001d53d7f$ee306e70$ca914b50$@net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 18-07-19, 08:46, Doug Smythies wrote:
> On 2019.07.18 03:28 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 17-07-19, 23:26, Doug Smythies wrote:
> >> This reverts commit ecd2884291261e3fddbc7651ee11a20d596bb514.
> >> 
> >> The commit caused a regression whereby reducing the maximum
> >> CPU clock frequency is ineffective while busy, and the CPU
> >> clock remains unchanged. Once the system has experienced
> >> some idle time, the new limit is implemented.
> >
> > Can you explain why this patch caused that issue ? I am sorry but I couldn't
> > understand it from your email. How are we trying to reduce the frequency? Is
> > clk_set_rate() getting called with that finally and not working ?
> 
> The patch eliminates the "flag", UNIT_MAX, and it's related comment,
> that was used to indicate if it was a limit change that causes the
> subsequent execution of sugov_update_single.

I think I may have understood the root cause. Please try the patch I just sent
as reply to this thread. Thanks.

-- 
viresh