linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/8] hwmon: (scmi) Register explicitly with Thermal Framework

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]

Date:   Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:58:58 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        sudeep.holla@....com, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] hwmon: (scmi) Register explicitly with Thermal
 Framework

On 10/28/22 08:35, Cristian Marussi wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> +	/*
>>> +	 * Try to register a temperature sensor with the Thermal Framework:
>>> +	 * skip sensors not defined as part of any thermal zone (-ENODEV) but
>>> +	 * report any other errors related to misconfigured zones/sensors.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	tzd = devm_thermal_of_zone_register(dev, th_sensor->info->id, th_sensor,
>>> +					    &scmi_hwmon_thermal_ops);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(tzd)) {
>>> +		devm_kfree(dev, th_sensor);
>>> +
>>> +		if (PTR_ERR(tzd) != -ENODEV)
>>> +			return PTR_ERR(tzd);
>>> +
>>> +		dev_info(dev, "Sensor '%s' not attached to any thermal zone.\n",
>>> +			 sensor->name);
>>
>> There were complaints about this message as it is noisy. If you send
>> another version, please drop it unless attaching each sensor to a thermal
>> zone is strongly expected. If you don't send another version, I'll drop it
>> while applying.
>>
> 
> Ok fine for me. I am waiting to have some feedback from Sudeep too, but
> I do not have plan for another version as of now.
> 
> As a side note, though, I understand the 'noisiness' argument, but,
> sincerely this same message in the original HWMON code was the only
> reason why I spotted that something was wrong with the SCMI/HWMON
> interactions and discovered the indexes/ids mismatch...if not for
> that it would have gone un-noticed that a perfectly configured
> ThermalZone/Sensor was not working properly...
> (un-noticed at least until something would have been burnt to fire
>   in my house .. joking :P)
> 

Good point.

Did you ever check the returned error code ? Maybe we could use it to
distinguish "it is not attached to a thermal zone because it is not
associated with one" from "attaching to a thermal zone failed because
its configuration is bad/incomplete".

Thanks,
Guenter