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
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