From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: fix jiffies/cputime mixup in conservative/ondemand governors
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 23:16:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1448859.RJLWEdIAIe@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m21ugq1vfi.fsf@igel.home>
On Monday 22 of October 2012 15:35:29 Andreas Schwab wrote:
> The function get_cpu_idle_time_jiffy in both the conservative and
> ondemand governors use jiffies_to_usecs to convert a cputime value to
> usecs which gives the wrong value on architectures where cputime and
> jiffies use different units. Only matters if NO_HZ is disabled, since
> otherwise get_cpu_idle_time_us should already return a valid value, and
> get_cpu_idle_time_jiffy isn't actually called.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
I have rebased your patch on top of some other changes in linux-pm.git/linux-next.
Please have a look at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next
and let me know if that's what you meant.
Thanks,
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> index a152af7..96af7d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> @@ -112,9 +112,9 @@ static inline u64 get_cpu_idle_time_jiffy(unsigned int cpu, u64 *wall)
>
> idle_time = cur_wall_time - busy_time;
> if (wall)
> - *wall = jiffies_to_usecs(cur_wall_time);
> + *wall = cputime_to_usecs(cur_wall_time);
>
> - return jiffies_to_usecs(idle_time);
> + return cputime_to_usecs(idle_time);
> }
>
> static inline cputime64_t get_cpu_idle_time(unsigned int cpu, cputime64_t *wall)
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> index 396322f..6c19a66 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> @@ -136,9 +136,9 @@ static inline u64 get_cpu_idle_time_jiffy(unsigned int cpu, u64 *wall)
>
> idle_time = cur_wall_time - busy_time;
> if (wall)
> - *wall = jiffies_to_usecs(cur_wall_time);
> + *wall = cputime_to_usecs(cur_wall_time);
>
> - return jiffies_to_usecs(idle_time);
> + return cputime_to_usecs(idle_time);
> }
>
> static inline cputime64_t get_cpu_idle_time(unsigned int cpu, cputime64_t *wall)
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-24 21:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-22 13:35 [PATCH] cpufreq: fix jiffies/cputime mixup in conservative/ondemand governors Andreas Schwab
2012-10-24 21:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2012-10-26 12:26 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-10-26 21:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-23 21:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-24 4:28 ` Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1448859.RJLWEdIAIe@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox