From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753139AbaEMEGq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 13 May 2014 00:06:46 -0400
Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:34875 "EHLO mga11.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752680AbaEMEGp (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 13 May 2014 00:06:45 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,1040,1389772800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="538032307"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 04:01:40 +0800
From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
To: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
Cc: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@gmail.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>,
        "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Change the calculation of
 next pstate
Message-ID: <20140512200140.GA10676@intel.com>
References: <5368255D.3090207@semaphore.gr>
 <536BEE89.3040602@gmail.com>
 <536CECB4.1090109@semaphore.gr>
 <53712F4B.7000101@semaphore.gr>
 <20140512193453.GB9351@intel.com>
 <537198AE.3050100@semaphore.gr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <537198AE.3050100@semaphore.gr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:59:42AM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 12/05/2014 10:34 μμ, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:30:03PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> >> On 09/05/2014 05:56 μμ, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> >>
> >> Next performance state = min_perf + (max_perf - min_perf) * load / 100
> >>
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This formula is fundamentally broken. You need to associate the load with its
> > frequency.
> 
> Could you please explain why is it broken? I think the load should be
> independent from the current frequency.

Why independent? The load not (somewhat) determined by that?