On 15-10-18, 23:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > > If the policy limits change between invocations of cs_dbs_update(), > the requested frequency value stored in dbs_info may not be updated > and the function may use a stale value of it next time. Moreover, if > idle periods are takem into account by cs_dbs_update(), the requested > frequency value stored in dbs_info may be below the min policy limit, > which is incorrect. > > To fix these problems, always update the requested frequency value > in dbs_info along with the local copy of it when the previous > requested frequency is beyond the policy limits and avoid decreasing > the requested frequency below the min policy limit when taking > idle periods into account. > > Reported-by: Waldemar Rymarkiewicz <waldemarx.rymarkiew...@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> -- viresh
