[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5d65cc4a.1c69fb81.376b6.2486@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:35:21 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, agross@...nel.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, edubezval@...il.com,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
marc.w.gonzalez@...e.fr, masneyb@...tation.org
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/15] arm64: dts: msm8996: thermal: Add interrupt support
Quoting Amit Kucheria (2019-08-27 05:14:05)
> Register upper-lower interrupts for each of the two tsens controllers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 60 ++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi
> index 96c0a481f454e..bb763b362c162 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi
> @@ -175,8 +175,8 @@
>
> thermal-zones {
> cpu0-thermal {
> - polling-delay-passive = <250>;
> - polling-delay = <1000>;
> + polling-delay-passive = <0>;
> + polling-delay = <0>;
Is it really necessary to change the configuration here to be 0 instead
of some number? Why can't we detect that there's an interrupt and then
ignore these properties?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists