On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08-02-16, 14:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> > - * If new rate is smaller than the old, simply updating >> > - * dbs_tuners_int.sampling_rate might not be appropriate. For example, if >> > the >> > - * original sampling_rate was 1 second and the requested new sampling >> > rate is 10 >> > - * ms because the user needs immediate reaction from ondemand governor, >> > but not >> > - * sure if higher frequency will be required or not, then, the governor >> > may >> > - * change the sampling rate too late; up to 1 second later. Thus, if we >> > are >> > - * reducing the sampling rate, we need to make the new value effective >> > - * immediately. >> >> The comment still applies. > > Why? It talks about the case where we have reduced sampling rate, but > that's not the case anymore. We *always* update sample_delay_ns now.
But the comment explains *why* we do that, doesn't it? If it doesn't apply, then why do we need this function at all? >> Moreover, please extend it to say that this must be called with >> dbs_data->mutex held (or it looks racy otherwise). > > Yeah, that can be done. OK Thanks, Rafael
