Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: dts: qcom: x1e78100-thinkpad-t14s: Add thermal zones for PMICs

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/21/26 19:14, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 06:20:55PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > On 10/21/26 10:49, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 06:08:56PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > > > Thanks Stephan for the additional information, that's very helpful.
> > > >
> > > > We currently have an urgent thermal issue on this platform, and getting this
> > > > thermal mitigation upstream is important to prevent overheating under
> > > > sustained workloads.
> > > >
> > > > Would it be acceptable to address the sensor naming and description
> > > > improvements in a follow-up patch, so that we can get the thermal protection
> > > > in place first?
> > > >
> > > > Of course, if any of these changes are critical for the correctness of the
> > > > thermal mitigation, we should address them now.
> > >
> > > I have no intention to delay this patch. In fact, since I'm using the
> > > latest unmodified stable kernel on my T14s, I'm also suffering from
> > > these thermal issues. :-)
> > >
> > > On the other hand, we are at the beginning of the merge window and Bjorn
> > > is unlikely to queue patches until that ends. The changes that
> > > I suggested are purely cosmetic (the names of the thermal zones), there
> > > is no need to repeat the thermal validation. The throttling behavior
> > > will be identical no matter which name is used for the thermal zones.
> > >
> > > IMO we should use the remaining time until the merge window ends to
> > > correct the naming to avoid any confusion for people reading the patch
> > > once it lands.
> >
> > Ok, fair enough
> >
> > I propose the following names for the thermal zone:
> >
> >   dram-board-thermal
> >   gpu-board-thermal
> >   fan-board-thermal
> >   wwan-board-thermal
> >   chg-board-thermal
> >   cpu-board-thermal
> >   typec-board-thermal
> >
> > so we can capture with the name the ones related to the non-on-die sensors
> >
> > Sounds good ?
>
> That works for me, I don't have a strong opinion about the naming (maybe
> @Konrad has?). I guess people reading this might mistakenly assume that
> these refer to separate "sub-boards" in the sense that there is a
> "mainboard", a "Type-C board", a "DRAM board", a "GPU board", etc.
> But I can't think of a better name either. :-)

Hmm, yes. That is a good a point