Re: [PATCH] thermal: Share THERMAL_NO_LIMIT between kernel and DT bindings

[Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 4:47 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 10/21/26 15:48, Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 3:43 PM Daniel Lezcano
> > <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> THERMAL_NO_LIMIT is defined separately in the thermal core and the DT
> >> bindings, using different expressions for the same no-limit sentinel.
> >>
> >> Define it as 0xffffffff in the DT bindings header and include that
> >> header from linux/thermal.h. Remove the duplicate kernel definition so
> >> both interfaces use the same unsigned 32-bit value while preserving
> >> the existing DT encoding.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > But THERMAL_NO_LIMIT is also used by the core on systems without DT,
> > so why is defining it in DT bindings not confusing?
>
> Yes, you are right. I missed ACPI relies on the THERMAL_NO_LIMIT default
> for the cooling spec

Well, in principle not just ACPI, but anyone whose .should_bind()
leaves the struct cooling_spec as is.