On 06/03/2013 02:24 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 3 June 2013 16:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> The question is if we want policy->max to re-scale them effectively (i.e. to
>> change weights so that the maximum load maps to the highest frequency
>> available
>> at the moment) or if we want policy
On 3 June 2013 16:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> The question is if we want policy->max to re-scale them effectively (i.e. to
> change weights so that the maximum load maps to the highest frequency
> available
> at the moment) or if we want policy->max to work as a cap (i.e. to map all
> loads ab
On Monday, June 03, 2013 12:25:02 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Sent half written mail.. sorry.. will continue from where I left.
>
> On 3 June 2013 12:21, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> > So, obviously the calculations aren't the same..
>
> Now, this is how I understood these two different variables:
> -
On Monday, June 03, 2013 12:21:47 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 2 June 2013 01:07, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 01, 2013 08:26:47 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> >> Even removal of __cpufreq_driver_getavg() should be done in a separate
> >> patch, so that it can be reverted easily if r
Sent half written mail.. sorry.. will continue from where I left.
On 3 June 2013 12:21, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> So, obviously the calculations aren't the same..
Now, this is how I understood these two different variables:
- cpuinfo.max_freq: maximum frequency (in kHz) which is
supported by this C
On 2 June 2013 01:07, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, June 01, 2013 08:26:47 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Even removal of __cpufreq_driver_getavg() should be done in a separate
>> patch, so that it can be reverted easily if required later.
>
> Why would you want to revert it separately?
We
On 1 June 2013 21:36, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> On 06/01/2013 05:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Even removal of __cpufreq_driver_getavg() should be done in a separate
>> patch, so that it can be reverted easily if required later.
>
> Thanks, Viresh. I will do the removal of that function in a sep
On Saturday, June 01, 2013 08:26:47 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 31 May 2013 22:03, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> > On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> I believe you should have removed other users of getavg() in a separate
> >> patch and also cc'd relevant people so that you can some rev
On 06/01/2013 05:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 31 May 2013 22:03, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
>> On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> I believe you should have removed other users of getavg() in a separate
>>> patch and also cc'd relevant people so that you can some review comments
>>> f
On 31 May 2013 22:03, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> I believe you should have removed other users of getavg() in a separate
>> patch and also cc'd relevant people so that you can some review comments
>> from them.
>
> I will split the patch in two. If i
On 06/01/2013 03:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 31, 2013 07:33:06 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
>> On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
d
On Friday, May 31, 2013 07:33:06 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> ---
> >> arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
> >> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
> >> drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 5
> >> driv
On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
>> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
>> drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 5
>> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 21
>> drivers/cpufreq
On Friday, May 31, 2013 02:24:59 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 31 May 2013 02:37, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
>
> Ahh.. earlier mail got sent without me doing complete review :(
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > +static void od_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned in
On 31 May 2013 02:37, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Ahh.. earlier mail got sent without me doing complete review :(
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +static void od_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load)
> {
> struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info = &per_cpu
Sorry for joining the party so late.. I was running away from reviewing it :(
On 31 May 2013 02:37, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> Ondemand calculates load in terms of frequency and increases it only
> if the load_freq is greater than up_threshold multiplied by current
> or average frequency. This se
Ondemand calculates load in terms of frequency and increases it only
if the load_freq is greater than up_threshold multiplied by current
or average frequency. This seems to produce oscillations of frequency
between min and max because, for example, a relatively small load can
easily saturate minimu
17 matches
Mail list logo
