On Friday, October 26, 2012 03:06:26 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Avoid calling cpufreq driver's target() routine if new frequency is same as
> policies current frequency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Looks reasonable.
Any objection from anyone?
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 261ef65..28dc134 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1476,6 +1476,10 @@ int __cpufreq_driver_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>
> pr_debug("target for CPU %u: %u kHz, relation %u\n", policy->cpu,
> target_freq, relation);
> +
> + if (target_freq == policy->cur)
> + return 0;
> +
> if (cpu_online(policy->cpu) && cpufreq_driver->target)
> retval = cpufreq_driver->target(policy, target_freq, relation);
>
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
