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: <7ee301b76beb679f89e946dfb5921a2d853bd8dc.camel@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] thermal/core: Build ascending ordered indexes
 for the trip points
From:   Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>, rafael@kernel.org
Cc:     quic_manafm@quicinc.com, amitk@kernel.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 09:14:55 +0800
In-Reply-To: <04bd27a8-5148-c8eb-5687-83ef511618df@linaro.org>
References: <20220715210911.714479-1-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
         <20220715210911.714479-3-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
         <6d08939a167870ff7c1c83bb254fda5939f1d648.camel@intel.com>
         <04bd27a8-5148-c8eb-5687-83ef511618df@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.1-0ubuntu1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2022-07-18 at 15:21 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>=20
> Hi Zhang,
>=20
> thanks for the review
>=20
> On 18/07/2022 07:28, Zhang Rui wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-07-15 at 23:09 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>=20
> [ ... ]
>=20
> > > Instead of taking the risk of breaking the existing platforms,
> > > use an
> > > array of temperature ordered trip identifiers and make it
> > > available
> > > for the code needing to browse the trip points in an ordered way.
> > >=20
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> > > ---
>=20
> [ ... ]
>=20
> > > +static void sort_trips_indexes(struct thermal_zone_device *tz)
> > > +{
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0int i, j;
> > > +
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0for (i =3D 0; i < tz->trip=
s; i++)
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0tz->trips_indexes[i] =3D i;
> > > +
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0for (i =3D 0; i < tz->trip=
s; i++) {
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0for (j =3D i + 1; j < tz->trips; j++) {
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0int=
 t1, t2;
> > > +
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0tz-=
>ops->get_trip_temp(tz, tz-
> > > > trips_indexes[i], &t1);
> >=20
> > This line can be moved to the upper loop.
>=20
> Right, thanks!
>=20
> > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0tz-=
>ops->get_trip_temp(tz, tz-
> > > > trips_indexes[j], &t2);
> > > +
> >=20
> > what about the disabled trip points?
> >=20
> > we should ignore those trip points and check the return value to
> > make
> > sure we're comparing the valid trip_temp values.
>=20
> We don't have to care about, whatever the position, the corresponding
> trip id will be disabled by the trip init function before calling
> this=20
> one and ignored in the handle_thermal_trip() function

hah, I missed this one and replied to your latest reply directly.

The thing I'm concerning is that=C2=A0if we don't check the return value,
for a disabled trip point, the trip_temp (t1/t2) returned is some
random value, it all depends on the previous value set by last
successful .get_trip_temp(), and this may screw up the sorting.

thanks,
rui
>=20
>=20