[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1e0545da-5d24-4ca4-863d-0d5671902d0b@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 14:06:07 +0100
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Laura Nao <laura.nao@...labora.com>, srini@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
rui.zhang@...el.com, lukasz.luba@....com, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com
Cc: nfraprado@...labora.com, arnd@...db.de, colin.i.king@...il.com,
u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com, andrew-ct.chen@...iatek.com,
lala.lin@...iatek.com, bchihi@...libre.com, frank-w@...lic-files.de,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...labora.com,
Fei Shao <fshao@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 4/9] thermal: mediatek: lvts: Add platform ops
to support alternative conversion logic
On 10/16/25 16:21, Laura Nao wrote:
> Introduce lvts_platform_ops struct to support SoC-specific versions of
> lvts_raw_to_temp() and lvts_temp_to_raw() conversion functions.
>
> This is in preparation for supporting SoCs like MT8196/MT6991, which
> require a different lvts_temp_to_raw() implementation.
>
> Reviewed-by: Fei Shao <fshao@...omium.org>
> Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> Tested-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> Signed-off-by: Laura Nao <laura.nao@...labora.com>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
> index 4ef549386add..df1c0f059ad0 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
> @@ -125,8 +125,14 @@ struct lvts_ctrl_data {
> continue; \
> else
>
> +struct lvts_platform_ops {
> + int (*lvts_raw_to_temp)(u32 raw_temp, int temp_factor);
> + u32 (*lvts_temp_to_raw)(int temperature, int temp_factor);
> +};
> +
> struct lvts_data {
> const struct lvts_ctrl_data *lvts_ctrl;
> + const struct lvts_platform_ops *ops;
> const u32 *conn_cmd;
> const u32 *init_cmd;
> int num_cal_offsets;
> @@ -300,6 +306,7 @@ static int lvts_get_temp(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int *temp)
> struct lvts_ctrl *lvts_ctrl = container_of(lvts_sensor, struct lvts_ctrl,
> sensors[lvts_sensor->id]);
> const struct lvts_data *lvts_data = lvts_ctrl->lvts_data;
> + const struct lvts_platform_ops *ops = lvts_data->ops;
> void __iomem *msr = lvts_sensor->msr;
> u32 value;
> int rc;
> @@ -332,7 +339,7 @@ static int lvts_get_temp(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int *temp)
> if (rc)
> return -EAGAIN;
>
> - *temp = lvts_raw_to_temp(value & 0xFFFF, lvts_data->temp_factor);
> + *temp = ops->lvts_raw_to_temp(value & 0xFFFF, lvts_data->temp_factor);
Don't do this in each functions. It does not help for the readability.
May be something like:
int lvts_raw_to_temp(u32 raw_temp, const struct lvts_ctrl_data)
{
return data->ops->lvts_temp_to_raw(raw_temp, data->temp_factor);
}
or
int lvts_raw_to_temp(u32 raw_temp, const struct lvts_ctrl_data)
{
int temperature;
if (data->ops->lvts_temp_to_raw)
return data->ops->lvts_temp_to_raw(raw_temp, data->temp_factor);
temperature = ((s64)(raw_temp & 0xFFFF) * temp_factor) >> 14;
temperature += golden_temp_offset;
return temperature;
}
... and get rid of all the lvts_platform_ops_v1
(btw _v1 is confusing, it suggests there multiple versions of the same SoC)
[ ... ]
--
<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