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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, November 17, 2016 09:10:59 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  -> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>

Applied.

Thanks,
Rafael