From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:38170 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752725AbdFRBJh (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jun 2017 21:09:37 -0400 Subject: Patch "cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10" has been added to the 3.18-stable tree To: twilczynski@naver.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org Cc: , From: Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 09:08:59 +0800 Message-ID: <149774813962215@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10 to the 3.18-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: cpufreq-conservative-allow-down_threshold-to-take-values-from-1-to-10.patch and it can be found in the queue-3.18 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let know about it. >>From b8e11f7d2791bd9320be1c6e772a60b2aa093e45 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Tomasz=20Wilczy=C5=84ski?= Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:28:39 +0900 Subject: cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Tomasz Wilczyński commit b8e11f7d2791bd9320be1c6e772a60b2aa093e45 upstream. Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking) removed the 10 point substraction when comparing the load against down_threshold but did not remove the related limit for the down_threshold value. As a result, down_threshold lower than 11 is not allowed even though values from 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The comment ("cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall") also does not apply after removing the substraction. For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99 and fix the related comment. Fixes: 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking) Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński Acked-by: Viresh Kumar Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c @@ -204,8 +204,8 @@ static ssize_t store_down_threshold(stru int ret; ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input); - /* cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall */ - if (ret != 1 || input < 11 || input > 100 || + /* cannot be lower than 1 otherwise freq will not fall */ + if (ret != 1 || input < 1 || input > 100 || input >= cs_tuners->up_threshold) return -EINVAL; Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from twilczynski@naver.com are queue-3.18/cpufreq-conservative-allow-down_threshold-to-take-values-from-1-to-10.patch