Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-153656-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4918025.31r3eYUQgx@kreacher> <3a8f1978-c5df-40d6-91ca-276431bb01e1@arm.com>
 <e8193798-4c02-423a-a9d8-63d29ebd7faa@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <e8193798-4c02-423a-a9d8-63d29ebd7faa@linaro.org>
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 17:48:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0i2pvTLwj7jTzwhoQMap_cvjvNnK2Beuje2COo+F4hBzA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] thermal/debugfs: Fix and clean up trip point
 statistics updates
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, 
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 5:34=E2=80=AFPM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 22/04/2024 13:37, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > Hi Rafael,
> >
> > On 4/17/24 14:07, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> The first patch in this series addresses the problem of updating trip
> >> point statistics prematurely for trip points that have just been
> >> crossed on the way down (please see the patch changelog for details).
> >>
> >> The way it does that renders the following cleanup patch inapplicable:
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/2321994.ElGaqSPkdT@kreacher/
> >>
> >> The remaining two patches in the series are cleanups on top of the
> >> first one.
> >>
> >> This series is based on an older patch series posted last week:
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/13515747.uLZWGnKmhe@kreacher/
> >>
> >> but it can be trivially rebased on top of the current linux-next.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I've checked this patch patch set on top of your bleeding-edge
> > which has thermal re-work as well. The patch set looks good
> > and works properly.
> >
> > Although, I have found some issue in this debug info files and
> > I'm not sure if this is expected or not. If not I can address this
> > and send some small fix for it.
> >
> > When I read the cooling device residency statistics, I don't
> > get updates for the first time the state is used. It can only
> > be counted when that state was known and finished it's usage.
> >
> > IMO it is not the right behavior, isn't it?
>
> Do you mean the right behavior is a regression

It has not changed AFAICS.

> or we should expect at least the residency to be showed even if the
> mitigation state is not closed ?

Well, in fact the device has already been in that state for some time
and the mitigation can continue for a while.