On 5 March 2013 13:22, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I had the same thoughts, but I saw the comments in the code: > > /* > * Every sampling_rate, we check, if current idle time is less than 20% > * (default), then we try to increase frequency Every sampling_rate * > * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80%, then > * we try to decrease frequency I misread it here when i looked at this mail for the first time. :) I strongly believe that we need a full stop (.) before "Every sampling_rate", otherwise it looks like we check for down_factor while increasing freq :) > * > > Also checking the code before the commit 8e677ce83bf41ba9c74e5b6d9ee60b07d4e5ed93 you may see that sampling down factor works in this way. > So, I decided to keep the original functionality (also down_skip was already there unused). I got that comment but i belive the code was never according to that comment and not even now. Check the initial patch for conservative governor: b9170836d1aa4ded7cc1ac1cb8fbc7867061c98c Even now we aren't checking this 80% thing, right? And so in your patch we can actually fix the patch too with the right logic of code.. And documentation too :) -- 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
