linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] thermal/core: Fix thermal trip cross point

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <af074493-d342-9439-8d78-c07c5df82203@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 15:06:19 +0200
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Cc:     quic_manafm@...cinc.com, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>, rafael@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] thermal/core: Fix thermal trip cross point

On 12/07/2022 14:40, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/12/22 13:30, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 12/07/2022 13:29, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>> @@ -511,8 +528,13 @@ void thermal_zone_device_update(struct 
>>>> thermal_zone_device *tz,
>>>>       tz->notify_event = event;
>>>> -    for (count = 0; count < tz->trips; count++)
>>>> -        handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    if (tz->last_temperature <= tz->temperature) {
>>>> +        for (count = 0; count < tz->trips; count++)
>>>> +            handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    } else {
>>>> +        for (count = tz->prev_trip; count >= 0; count--)
>>>> +            handle_thermal_trip(tz, count);
>>>> +    }
>>>
>>> In general the code look good. I have one question, though:
>>> Is it always true that these trip points coming from the DT
>>> and parsed in thermal_of_build_thermal_zone() populated by
>>>      for_each_child_of_node(child, gchild) {
>>>           thermal_of_populate_trip(gchild, &tz->trips[i++]);
>>>
>>> are always defined in right order in DT?
>>
>> Hmm, that is a good question. Even if the convention is to put the 
>> trip point in the ascending order, I don't find any documentation 
>> telling it is mandatory. Given that I don't feel particularly 
>> comfortable to assume that is the case.
>>
>> Perhaps, it would make more sense to build a map of indexes telling 
>> the order in the trip points and work with it instead.
>>
>>
> 
> Sounds a reliable way to move forward. Maybe you could just sort in the
> right order those trip points in the thermal_of_build_thermal_zone()
> in an additional patch to this series?
> Than this patch could stay as is, because it looks go

Unfortunately, there is the manual setup as well as the ACPI.



-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog