https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65501 --- Comment #13 from sworddragon2@xxxxxxx --- > There is no floating point division here :) Than lets repeat this text with MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD as 2. But... > And even if we do that, we don't really need to take care of loads lesser than > 1%, that's too small.. ... we are moving now into the correct direction :) This is the point that disturbs me. We are setting a fixed minimum limit of 11 while there is no logical reason to do this. Lets make the hypothetical assumption that MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD could be set to 1: - Current systems wouldn't be affected as they have already a value >= 11. - New systems with a default kernel would keep still the default value that is >= 11. So there is no disadvantage for these systems. But users now have the advantage that they can make there own decision how low they want to go. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. -- 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
