netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Revert "mlxsw: core: Use different get_trend() callbacks for different thermal zones"

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]

Message-ID: <409cd6c3-5ae1-01c6-e774-c60718fa459b@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 Aug 2022 13:56:25 +0200
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
Cc:     rafael@...nel.org, vadimp@...lanox.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@...dia.com>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Revert "mlxsw: core: Use different get_trend()
 callbacks for different thermal zones"


Hi Ido,

On 15/08/2022 13:47, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 11:10:31AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> This reverts commit 2dc2f760052da4925482ecdcdc5c94d4a599153c.
>>
>> As discussed in the thread:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/f3c62ebe-7d59-c537-a010-bff366c8aeba@linaro.org/
>>
>> the feature provided by commits 2dc2f760052da and 6f73862fabd93 is
>> actually already handled by the thermal framework via the cooling
>> device state aggregation, thus all this code is pointless.
>>
>> No conflict happened when reverting the patch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
>> Tested-by: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@...dia.com>
> 
> Daniel, the intention is to send these patches to mainline as part of
> your 6.1 pull request?

Yes, I told Vadim I prefer the change to go through my tree because it 
is part of a rework of the thermal core internals which impact more drivers.

> I discussed it with Vadim yesterday and we do not expect changes in the
> file during the current cycle so this is OK as far as we are concerned,
> but I believe this will also need an ack from one of the netdev
> maintainers.

Sure.

Dave, Eric,

Is that fine if the changes go through my tree ?



-- 
<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