linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] thermal: imx8mm: Allow reboot after critical temperature

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:25:31 -0300
From:   Fabio Estevam <festevam@...x.de>
To:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Cc:     daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        rafael@...nel.org, amitk@...nel.org, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] thermal: imx8mm: Allow reboot after critical
 temperature

Hi Daniel,

On 24/08/2023 11:36, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...x.de>
> 
> Currently, after the SoC reaches the critical temperature, the board
> goes through a poweroff mechanism.
> 
> In some cases, such behavior does not suit well, as the board may be
> unattended in the field and rebooting may be a better approach.
> 
> The bootloader may also check the temperature and only allow the boot 
> to
> proceed when the temperature is below a certain threshold.
> 
> Introduce a 'reboot_on_crit' sysfs entry to indicate that the board
> will go through a reboot after the critical temperature is reached.
> 
> By default, the original shutdown behavior is preserved.
> 
> Tested on a imx8mm-evk board by issuing the command below:
> 
> echo 1 > 
> /sys/devices/platform/soc@...0000000.bus/30260000.tmu/reboot_on_crit
> 
> Confirmed that it goes through a reboot after the critical temperature
> is reached.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...x.de>
> ---
> Changes since v3:
> - Add a sysfs entry.

After thinking more about this, I am happier with the previous v3.

The decision to reboot or shutdown is not something that needs to be
changed in runtime.

If the module_param() approach from v3 could be accepted, I think it 
would be
a better solution.

Thanks