Re: RFC on cpufreq implementation

Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:22:52 +0530

Newsgroups	org.kernel.vger.cpufreq,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm
Message-ID	<CAKohponGjLkniP2=Aj-Jsg7hfAEnW3p0+EwtrobdCymgT-yqgg@mail.gmail.com>

On 15 January 2015 at 22:54, Mason <[email protected]> wrote:
> I decided to expose only a small subset of frequencies (namely
> {999,500,333,111} MHz) because, in my tests, the ondemand gov
> chose mostly min and max, and the intermediate frequencies not
> so much; so I figured "2 intermediate freqs" is good enough.
> (I'm ready to hear otherwise.)

Following patch solved this issue in 3.17..

6393d6a1027e cpufreq: ondemand: Eliminate the deadband effect