Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1663232 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take  values from 1 to 10 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2017-06-12 05:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2017-06-12 14:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take  values from 1 to 10 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2017-06-13 08:10 +0200

#1663232 — Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10

On 11-06-17, 17:28, Tomasz Wilczyński wrote:
> Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4cd78b198be9758c538cdede36d8a ("cpufreq: conservative:
> Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking") removed the 10 point
> substraction when comparing the load against down_threshold but did not
> remove the related limit for the down_threshold value. As a result,
> down_threshold lower than 11 is not allowed even though values from
> 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The comment ("cannot be lower than 11
> otherwise freq will not fall") is also not true after removing the
> substraction.
> 
> For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99
> and fix the related comment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com>

Please add Fixes tag and relevant kernel release for stable tag.

> ---
>  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 992f7c2..88220ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> @@ -185,8 +185,8 @@ static ssize_t store_down_threshold(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set,
>  	int ret;
>  	ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
>  
> -	/* cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall */
> -	if (ret != 1 || input < 11 || input > 100 ||
> +	/* cannot be lower than 1 otherwise freq will not fall */
> +	if (ret != 1 || input < 1 || input > 100 ||
>  			input >= dbs_data->up_threshold)
>  		return -EINVAL;

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1663469 — Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10

On Monday, June 12, 2017 09:10:35 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11-06-17, 17:28, Tomasz Wilczyński wrote:
> > Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4cd78b198be9758c538cdede36d8a ("cpufreq: conservative:
> > Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking") removed the 10 point
> > substraction when comparing the load against down_threshold but did not
> > remove the related limit for the down_threshold value. As a result,
> > down_threshold lower than 11 is not allowed even though values from
> > 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The comment ("cannot be lower than 11
> > otherwise freq will not fall") is also not true after removing the
> > substraction.
> > 
> > For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99
> > and fix the related comment.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com>
> 
> Please add Fixes tag and relevant kernel release for stable tag.

Actually, the Fixes: tag would be sufficient and then adding it would be
appreciated.

No need to resend the patch, though.

Thanks,
Rafael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1664473

On 13-06-17, 14:58, Tomasz Wilczynski wrote:
> This is my first patch so please bare with me...

No worries, we were just telling you about what's the right way..

> I am just a little
> confused. Does this mean that it is all right to leave the patch as it is,
> or should I still add the Fixes: tag and resubmit it?

Rafael has already applied the patch with all the required tags (look
in the PM tree):

commit b8e11f7d2791bd9320be1c6e772a60b2aa093e45
Author: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com>
Date:   Sun Jun 11 17:28:39 2017 +0900

    cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10
    
    Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency
    decrease checking) removed the 10 point substraction when comparing the
    load against down_threshold but did not remove the related limit for the
    down_threshold value.  As a result, down_threshold lower than 11 is not
    allowed even though values from 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The
    comment ("cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall") also
    does not apply after removing the substraction.
    
    For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99
    and fix the related comment.
    
    Fixes: 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking)
    Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com>
    Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
    Cc: 3.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.10+
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
viresh

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web