linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] thermal: Add Tegra SOCTHERM thermal management driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140821160821.GC17621@developer>
Date:	Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:08:22 -0400
From:	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>, rui.zhang@...el.com,
	thierry.reding@...il.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] thermal: Add Tegra SOCTHERM thermal management
 driver

Hello Stephen,

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 01:50:48PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/06/2014 04:25 AM, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> > This adds support for the Tegra SOCTHERM thermal sensing and management
> > system found in the Tegra124 system-on-chip. This initial driver supports
> > temperature polling for four thermal zones.
> 
> Since both the Tegra DT patches and this driver all rely on a new header 
> added by patch 1/4, I guess this whole series needs to be applied in one 
> branch. I think it makes sense to apply it to the Tegra since it's 
> likely to have more conflicts there and fewer in the thermal 
> maintainer's tree. It can be applied in a topic branch that can be 
> merged into the thermal maintainer's tree if required to resolve 
> conflicts there.

I agree with you here. The conflicts on thermal side should be mostly on
Kconfigs and Makefiles. But the device tree part should not be hard to
deal with too though.

> 
> Rui, Eduardo, do you agree?

Once we get it properly reviewed and acked, then I am not against it
going via tegra tree, no.

Cheers,

> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/tegra_soctherm.c b/drivers/thermal/tegra_soctherm.c
> 
> > +static struct of_device_id tegra_soctherm_of_match[] = {
> > +	{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-soctherm" },
> > +	{ },
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tegra_soctherm_of_match);
> > +
> > +static int thermctl_temp_offsets[] = {
> > +	SENSOR_TEMP1, SENSOR_TEMP2, SENSOR_TEMP1, SENSOR_TEMP2
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int thermctl_temp_shifts[] = {
> > +	16, 16, 0, 0
> > +};
> 
> Can any/all of those be const?
> 
> I don't pretend to know anything about the soctherm HW, but I see no 
> gross issues in the code structure, so,
> Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/