Thread (81 messages) 81 messages, 7 authors, 2018-02-08

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates

From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Date: 2017-12-21 10:30:29
Also in: lkml

On 21-12-17, 11:25, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 02:45:02PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
quoted
On 20-12-17, 16:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted
The below makes more sense to me too; hmm?
@@ -335,12 +335,11 @@ static unsigned int sugov_next_freq_shar
 
 		j_max = j_sg_cpu->max;
 		j_util = sugov_aggregate_util(j_sg_cpu);
+		sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &util, &max);
This should 'obviously' have been:

		sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &j_util, *j_max);
Actually it should be:

 		sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &j_util, &j_max);

and this is how it was in the commit I reviewed from your tree. But my query
still stands, what difference will it make ?
quoted
quoted
 		if (j_util * max > j_max * util) {
 			util = j_util;
 			max = j_max;
 		}
-
-		sugov_iowait_boost(j_sg_cpu, &util, &max);
-- 
viresh
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help