Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates

[Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>]

On 16-11-16, 21:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong.
> 
> Both increase and decrease happen at steps.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> ---
>  -> v2
> Remove a trailing space
> 
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> index a48b724..7522ec6 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_freq_step(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners,
>   * sampling_down_factor, we check, if current idle time is more than 80%
>   * (default), then we try to decrease frequency
>   *
> - * Any frequency increase takes it to the maximum frequency. Frequency reduction
> - * happens at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum frequency
> + * Frequency updates happen at minimum steps of 5% (default) of maximum
> + * frequency
>   */
>  static unsigned int cs_dbs_update(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  {

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh