Re: [patch 1/1] cpufreq_conservative/ondemand: invert meaning of'ignore nice'

[Andrew Morton]

Alexander Clouter <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it. This 
>  removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a 
>  'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes are 
>  not counted towards the 'business' calculation.

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c:226: error: 'store_ignore_nice_load' undeclared here (not in a function)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/