From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756285Ab2KWUbz (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:31:55 -0500 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([193.178.161.156]:35338 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756188Ab2KWUby (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:31:54 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Fabio Baltieri Cc: Viresh Kumar , cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ondemand: fix wrong delay sampling rate Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 21:36:25 +0100 Message-ID: <2571565.iEnLnHRzpM@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.3 (Linux/3.7.0-rc6; KDE/4.9.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20121123195700.GA29269@balto.lan> References: <1353676358-4385-1-git-send-email-fabio.baltieri@linaro.org> <20121123195700.GA29269@balto.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, November 23, 2012 08:57:02 PM Fabio Baltieri wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 07:23:28PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 23 November 2012 18:42, Fabio Baltieri wrote: > > > Restore the correct delay value for ondemand's od_dbs_timer, as it was > > > changed erroneously in 83f0e55. > > > > > > Cc: Viresh Kumar > > > Signed-off-by: Fabio Baltieri > > > --- > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c > > > index bdaab92..cca3e9f 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c > > > @@ -234,7 +234,8 @@ static void od_dbs_timer(struct work_struct *work) > > > dbs_info->sample_type = OD_SUB_SAMPLE; > > > delay = dbs_info->freq_hi_jiffies; > > > } else { > > > - delay = delay_for_sampling_rate(dbs_info->rate_mult); > > > + delay = delay_for_sampling_rate(od_tuners.sampling_rate > > > + * dbs_info->rate_mult); > > > > So sorry for my poor code :( > > Actually I think that the new code is much better structured, and the > patch was so big that I'll be surprised if this would be the only bug! > > My problem is that I had to rewrite a patch based on the old code almost > line-by-line but... these are the rules of the game! > > > Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar Applied to linux-pm.git/linux-next as v3.8 material. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.