Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <af074493-d342-9439-8d78-c07c5df82203@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 15:06:19 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] thermal/core: Fix thermal trip cross point
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc:     quic_manafm@quicinc.com, rui.zhang@intel.com,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Amit Kucheria <amitk@kernel.org>, rafael@kernel.org
References: <20220708183210.1334839-1-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
 <20220708183210.1334839-3-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
 <6ce87fbb-1460-503b-f1f1-8cf53e702cdf@arm.com>
 <2d680cd9-9e97-e06c-55c2-2a3a1504488e@linaro.org>
 <5d513646-a917-b969-b2d2-9d5f4e0e6f4d@arm.com>
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <5d513646-a917-b969-b2d2-9d5f4e0e6f4d@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/07/2022 14:40, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/12/22 13:30, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 12/07/2022 13:29, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>> @@ -511,8 +528,13 @@ void thermal_zone_device_update(struct 
>>>> thermal_zone_device *tz,
>>>>       tz->notify_event = event;
>>>> -    for (count = 0; count < tz->trips; count++)
>>>> -        handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    if (tz->last_temperature <= tz->temperature) {
>>>> +        for (count = 0; count < tz->trips; count++)
>>>> +            handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    } else {
>>>> +        for (count = tz->prev_trip; count >= 0; count--)
>>>> +            handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    }
>>>
>>> In general the code look good. I have one question, though:
>>> Is it always true that these trip points coming from the DT
>>> and parsed in thermal_of_build_thermal_zone() populated by
>>>      for_each_child_of_node(child, gchild) {
>>>           thermal_of_populate_trip(gchild, &tz->trips[i++]);
>>>
>>> are always defined in right order in DT?
>>
>> Hmm, that is a good question. Even if the convention is to put the 
>> trip point in the ascending order, I don't find any documentation 
>> telling it is mandatory. Given that I don't feel particularly 
>> comfortable to assume that is the case.
>>
>> Perhaps, it would make more sense to build a map of indexes telling 
>> the order in the trip points and work with it instead.
>>
>>
> 
> Sounds a reliable way to move forward. Maybe you could just sort in the
> right order those trip points in the thermal_of_build_thermal_zone()
> in an additional patch to this series?
> Than this patch could stay as is, because it looks go

Unfortunately, there is the manual setup as well as the ACPI.


-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog