From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Piel Subject: Re: [PATCH] keep ignore_nice_load value when the ondemand govenor is reselected Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:26:11 +0100 Message-ID: <44224D93.5080101@tremplin-utc.net> References: <4411485F.1010401@tremplin-utc.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4411485F.1010401@tremplin-utc.net> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" To: Venkatesh Pallipadi , Dave Jones Cc: CPUFreq Mailing List 10.03.2006 10:35, Eric Piel wrote/a =C3=A9crit: > Hello, >=20 > With the ondemand governor, ignore_nice_load is reset each time the=20 > governor is selected. That's annoying because each time I change to=20 > another governor and change back to ondemand, I also have to set up=20 > ignore_nice_load. eg: > # cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice_load > 1 > # cpufreq-set -g powersave > # cpufreq-set -g ondemand > # cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice_load > 0 >=20 > This behavior is also inconsistent with the other variables of=20 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ >=20 > Attached is a patch that corrects the behavior. Hello, I've sent this patch and "Warn if ondemand governor can not run=20 due to too long transition latency" mostly 2 weeks ago and didn't get=20 any feedback. It would be nice if at least this patch could make it to=20 2.6.17 as it fixes a glitch. Venki, could you ACK or NACK these patches? Dave, if they don't apply cleanly against the cpufreq git tree (due to=20 the big clean up commit), I can redo them... just let me know :-) Eric