On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> untested patch to add this to cpufreq; this is probably a good idea in
> general even if using the latency framework doesn't end up being used
> for fixing this regression...
>
>
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc2/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c.org 2007-08-20
> 22:58:32.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc2/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c 2007-08-20
> 23:02:21.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1604,6 +1604,12 @@ static int __cpufreq_set_policy(struct c
> if (ret)
> goto error_out;
>
> +
> + if (system_latency_constraint() < policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency) {
That looks broken. "system_latency_constraint()" is in us, but
transition_latency is in ns, afaik.
But adding a "/ 1000" to turn the ns into us, and it migth even work.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
