[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJ+Do990LVNQx4rp@uf8f119305bce5e.ant.amazon.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 18:38:43 -0700
From: Eduardo Valentin <evalenti@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Eduardo Valentin <evalenti@...nel.org>, eduval@...zon.com,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] thermal: sysfs: avoid actual readings from sysfs
Hey Daniel,
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 12:11:25PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On 30/06/2023 10:16, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 11:10 PM Eduardo Valentin <evalenti@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > So what about adding a new zone attribute that can be used to specify
> > the preferred caching time for the temperature?
> >
> > That is, if the time interval between two consecutive updates of the
> > cached temperature value is less than the value of the new attribute,
> > the cached temperature value will be returned by "temp". Otherwise,
> > it will cause the sensor to be read and the value obtained from it
> > will be returned to user space and cached.
> >
> > If the value of the new attribute is 0, everything will work as it
> > does now (which will also need to be the default behavior).
>
> I'm still not convinced about the feature.
>
> Eduardo provided some numbers but they seem based on the characteristics
> of the I2C, not to a real use case. Eduardo?
Why I2C is not a real use case?
--
All the best,
Eduardo Valentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists