Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932104AbaGCNvh (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:51:37 -0400 Received: from hqemgate15.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.64]:15272 "EHLO hqemgate15.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752581AbaGCNvf (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:51:35 -0400 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqnvupgp07.nvidia.com on Thu, 03 Jul 2014 06:41:10 -0700 Message-ID: <53B55FE3.6010202@nvidia.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 16:51:31 +0300 From: Mikko Perttunen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Warren , "rui.zhang@intel.com" , "edubezval@gmail.com" , "thierry.reding@gmail.com" , Peter De Schrijver , Matthew Longnecker CC: "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] thermal: Add Tegra SOCTHERM thermal management driver References: <1403856699-2140-1-git-send-email-mperttunen@nvidia.com> <1403856699-2140-7-git-send-email-mperttunen@nvidia.com> <53B1D538.6000704@wwwdotorg.org> <53B26BF2.7090009@nvidia.com> <53B2FD61.9000101@wwwdotorg.org> In-Reply-To: <53B2FD61.9000101@wwwdotorg.org> X-NVConfidentiality: public Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/07/14 21:26, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Ah, so there's some manufacturing calibration process that sets some > fuse value, and the HW uses a combination of that fuse value, and some > parameters of the manufacturing process as represented by the > SENSOR_CONFIG2 register, to apply the calibration? I wonder why > SENSOR_CONFIG2 is a register not a fuse in that case, but anyway... > > Perhaps some comments or kerneldoc in the definition of struct > tegra_tsensor would be useful? Yes, I'll add some comments. > > Why not read THERMCTL_INTR_STATUS inside the IRQ thread. IIRC, if the > ISR wakes an IRQ thread, the interrupt remains disable until the thread > has run its course, so there's no issue deferring the register read > until the thread runs, at which point, the thread can simply loop over > all the sensors. > If that's the case, then that's definitely a better way to do it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/