On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:48:42 +0530 Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 16 December 2014 at 02:54, Pan, Jacob jun > <jacob.jun....@intel.com> wrote: > > > Looks good to me. You can add my Reviewed-by to the above patch. > > Thanks. > > > I have tested this fix and confirm powerclamp is working properly > > now. > > Oh, nice. > > > However, we also have a planned patch for consolidated idle loop. > > With this patch it causes some erratic behavior in idle injection. > > I can’t seem to synchronize/align idle time around jiffies with > > this patch + fix. > > > > Any suggestions welcome. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/4/56 > > And all works fine without this patch ? well, there are other things i need to improve. but this patch definitely causes some new unwanted behavior. > 2a16fc93d2c9 ("nohz: Avoid tick's double reprogramming in highres > mode") > > I really don't know what stuff out of the two patches I posted (The > above one and the fix I posted yesterday), will possible make the > synchronization bad .. > But since your patch has real benefits and does not cause regression with the current code, there is no reason to hold it back. I was just hoping to get help on debugging this. thanks, Jacob > -- > viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
