[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1ec4d34d-6700-0f99-81e3-1c7129a80246@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 18:29:40 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi <quic_manafm@...cinc.com>,
"Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] thermal/core: Build ascending ordered indexes for
the trip points
Hi Rafael,
On 22/07/2022 19:40, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[ ... ]
> They can be made in the opposite direction, starting at the core
> level. Then, it would be clear where you were going.
>
>> I would like to
>> keep the indexes trip array approach to fix the trip cross events which
>> is broken right now and then go forward with the struct thermal_trip
>> changes and the thermal-of cleanups I've sent last week.
>>
>> Does it sound reasonable ?
>
> I'm not convinced about the need to make the code more complicated if
> the overall direction is to simplify it.
>
> I understand that you want to avoid regressing things, but you want to
> make these changes eventually anyway, so why to you think that the
> risk of regressing things would be smaller in the future, after making
> the code more complicated than it is now? Sounds counter-intuitive to
> me.
Ok, I'll rework the core code for that.
Having the series [1] and the new version of [2] will have the trip
point partly reworked.
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
<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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists