Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752181AbbBWBiv (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2015 20:38:51 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:2886 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751290AbbBWBit convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2015 20:38:49 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,628,1418112000"; d="scan'208";a="689203649" From: "Ong, Boon Leong" To: "Kweh, Hock Leong" , "Zhang, Rui" , "edubezval@gmail.com" CC: "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , LKML , "Bryan O'Donoghue" Subject: RE: [PATCH] thermal: intel Quark SoC X1000 DTS thermal driver Thread-Topic: [PATCH] thermal: intel Quark SoC X1000 DTS thermal driver Thread-Index: AQHQRhthue+lW/FBiEKybiZlya5HaJzsNOnQgAAkD6CAESm0MA== Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 01:38:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1423673509-11195-1-git-send-email-boon.leong.ong@intel.com> <1423673509-11195-2-git-send-email-boon.leong.ong@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.30.20.206] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1827 Lines: 44 >Just to bring out for discussion, do you think we should put a "safety range" >for reporting out the critical trip temperature value (mean the value from >register minus 1 or 2 degree)? > >Just wondering if this is needed for the software to have the sufficient >shutdown time before the HW make a hard power cut off when the >critical trip point is reached. I assume that the suggestion is meant for the case where thermal register is not locked by BIOS. It is not a bad idea to have some protection against wrong configuration on critical trip point by user. Looking through the data-sheet in Quark, I could not find an recommended temperature. So, I propose that we use the same value set by BIOS today - 105C as the maximum. >> +static struct soc_sensor_entry *alloc_soc_dts(void) >> +{ >> + struct soc_sensor_entry *aux_entry; >> + int err; >> + u32 out; >> + int wr_mask; >> + >> + aux_entry = kzalloc(sizeof(*aux_entry), GFP_KERNEL); > >Wondering is it possible to use the resource-managed functions (for e.g. >devm_kzalloc())? This could help the driver looks more neat and clean >where the resource-managed framework will help you take care all the >kfree(). > >Understand that the flow here is to call the thermal_zone_device_register() >function after this aux_entry allocation. > >But thinking would it also working if change the flow to call >thermal_zone_device_register() function 1st to obtain the >thermal_zone_device >then later on perform devm_kzalloc() and assign it back to devdata. > Ok, it is worth exploring on this devm_kzalloc() for neatness. Thanks! -- 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/