On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 07:23:28PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 23 November 2012 18:42, Fabio Baltieri <[email protected]> wrote: > > Restore the correct delay value for ondemand's od_dbs_timer, as it was > > changed erroneously in 83f0e55. > > > > Cc: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Fabio Baltieri <[email protected]> > > --- > > 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 <[email protected]> Thanks, Fabio -- Fabio Baltieri -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
