Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Rectify comment in sugov_irq_work() function

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> * Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> This patch rectifies a comment present in sugov_irq_work() function to
>> follow proper grammar.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 12 ++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> index 42a220e78f00..71e1a980d40a 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> @@ -315,15 +315,15 @@ static void sugov_irq_work(struct irq_work *irq_work)
>>       sg_policy = container_of(irq_work, struct sugov_policy, irq_work);
>>
>>       /*
>> +      * For Real Time and Deadline tasks, the schedutil governor shoots the
>> +      * frequency to maximum. Special care must be taken to ensure that this
>> +      * kthread doesn't result in the same behavior.
>>        *
>>        * This is (mostly) guaranteed by the work_in_progress flag. The flag is
>> +      * updated only at the end of the sugov_work() function and before that
>> +      * the schedutil governor rejects all other frequency scaling requests.
>>        *
>> +      * There is a very rare case though, where the RT thread yields right
>>        * after the work_in_progress flag is cleared. The effects of that are
>>        * neglected for now.
>>        */
>
> Also:
>
>   s/Real Time task/RT task
>   s/Deadline task/deadline task
>
> With those:
>
>   Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>

Fixed up and applied.

Thanks,
Rafael