Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.32 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.32;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <12350772.O9o76ZdvQC@kreacher> <4869676.GXAFRqVoOG@kreacher> <ce9297d4-db9f-44c7-a590-2b9d4600be42@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <ce9297d4-db9f-44c7-a590-2b9d4600be42@linaro.org>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:14:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0j34VB6mkKjscU0BpQ8wvgeutr_2U50OznsmxSdTVySDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] thermal: trip: Rework thermal_zone_set_trip() and
 its callers
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

Hi Daniel,

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:54 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On 29/11/2023 14:38, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > Both trip_point_temp_store() and trip_point_hyst_store() use
> > thermal_zone_set_trip() to update a given trip point, but none of them
> > actually needs to change more than one field in struct thermal_trip
> > representing it.  However, each of them effectively calls
> > __thermal_zone_get_trip() twice in a row for the same trip index value,
> > once directly and once via thermal_zone_set_trip(), which is not
> > particularly efficient, and the way in which thermal_zone_set_trip()
> > carries out the update is not particularly straightforward.
> >
> > Moreover, some checks done by them both need not go under the thermal
> > zone lock and code duplication between them can be reduced quite a bit
> > by moving the majority of logic into thermal_zone_set_trip().
> >
> > Rework all of the above functions to address the above.
>
> Please hold on before merging this change. I've some comment about it
> but I have to double check a couple of things before

That's fine, but why don't you make the comment before the double checks?