linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v6 1/2] ACPI: thermal: Add Thermal fast Sampling Period (

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:   Wed, 22 Nov 2023 18:25:10 +0530
From:   Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC:     <rui.zhang@...el.com>, <lenb@...nel.org>, <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
        <guohanjun@...wei.com>, <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <treding@...dia.com>,
        <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <bbasu@...dia.com>, <sanjayc@...dia.com>,
        <ksitaraman@...dia.com>, <srikars@...dia.com>,
        <jbrasen@...dia.com>, "Sumit Gupta" <sumitg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v6 1/2] ACPI: thermal: Add Thermal fast Sampling Period
 (_TFP) support



On 22/11/23 01:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 7:34 PM Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Jeff Brasen <jbrasen@...dia.com>
>>
>> Add support of "Thermal fast Sampling Period (_TFP)" for Passive cooling.
>> As per [1], _TFP overrides the "Thermal Sampling Period (_TSP)" if both
>> are present in a Thermal zone.
>>
>> [1] ACPI Specification 6.4 - section 11.4.17. _TFP (Thermal fast Sampling
>>      Period)"
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen <jbrasen@...dia.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/acpi/thermal.c | 12 +++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/thermal.c b/drivers/acpi/thermal.c
>> index f74d81abdbfc..3b75eb2260d7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/thermal.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/thermal.c
>> @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ struct acpi_thermal_passive {
>>          struct acpi_thermal_trip trip;
>>          unsigned long tc1;
>>          unsigned long tc2;
>> -       unsigned long tsp;
>> +       unsigned long delay;
>>   };
>>
>>   struct acpi_thermal_active {
>> @@ -404,11 +404,17 @@ static bool passive_trip_params_init(struct acpi_thermal *tz)
>>
>>          tz->trips.passive.tc2 = tmp;
>>
>> +       status = acpi_evaluate_integer(tz->device->handle, "_TFP", NULL, &tmp);
>> +       if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) {
>> +               tz->trips.passive.delay = tmp;
>> +               return true;
>> +       }
>> +
>>          status = acpi_evaluate_integer(tz->device->handle, "_TSP", NULL, &tmp);
>>          if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
>>                  return false;
>>
>> -       tz->trips.passive.tsp = tmp;
>> +       tz->trips.passive.delay = tmp * 100;
>>
>>          return true;
>>   }
>> @@ -904,7 +910,7 @@ static int acpi_thermal_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>>
>>          acpi_trip = &tz->trips.passive.trip;
>>          if (acpi_thermal_trip_valid(acpi_trip)) {
>> -               passive_delay = tz->trips.passive.tsp * 100;
>> +               passive_delay = tz->trips.passive.delay;
>>
>>                  trip->type = THERMAL_TRIP_PASSIVE;
>>                  trip->temperature = acpi_thermal_temp(tz, acpi_trip->temp_dk);
>> --
> 
> So does the second patch in the series really depend on this one?
> 
> If not, I can apply it I think.

Yes, this patch can be applied independently. Thank you!

Best Regards,
Sumit Gupta