Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework

[Viresh Kumar]

On 18-04-19, 09:04, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 18 Apr 2019 at 09:23:23 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 17-04-19, 10:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >  static struct thermal_cooling_device *
> > >  __cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node *np,
> > > -			struct cpufreq_policy *policy, u32 capacitance)
> > > +			struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > > +			struct em_perf_domain *em)
> > >  {
> > 
> > > +	if (em_is_sane(cpufreq_cdev, em)) {
> > > +		cpufreq_cdev->em = em;
> > >  		cooling_ops = &cpufreq_power_cooling_ops;
> > > -	} else {
> > > +	} else if (policy->freq_table_sorted != CPUFREQ_TABLE_UNSORTED) {
> > >  		cooling_ops = &cpufreq_cooling_ops;
> > > +	} else {
> > > +		WARN(1, "cpu_cooling: no valid frequency table found\n");
> > 
> > Well the frequency table is valid, isn't it ?
> 
> True ...
> 
> > Maybe something like: "cpu_cooling doesn't support unsorted frequency tables" ?
> 
> Right, otherwise I guess that could be confused with the check on
> cpu_table_count_valid_entries() above. And while I'm thinking about it
> perhaps WARN is a bit too much here ? We can handle the error safely so
> pr_err() should be enough ?

Hmm, I would keep the WARN as it is hard to miss it compared to a
simple pr_err.

-- 
viresh