Re: [PATCH 2/3] thermal: Add Mediatek thermal controller support

[Matthias Brugger]

On 15/02/16 03:14, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Eduardo, Sascha,
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:29 +0800, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > > Eduardo,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 03:19:40PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > > > Hi Eduardo,
> > > > >
> > > > > > That should remove the policy of computing the maximum from this driver.
> > > > > > Please have a look on the work being done [1] to add grouping and
> > > > > > aggregation of thermal zones. With that in place, you should be a matter
> > > > > > of configuring the grouping and selecting max as the aggregation function,
> > > > > > from the thermal core, instead in the driver. Which should give the
> > > > > > system engineer, more flexibility to compose whatever policy based on
> > > > > > the exposed sensors.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the aggregation of thermal zones is quite useful when it comes
> > > > > to putting different chips together to a system. I am not so sure how
> > > > > useful it is to expose different thermal zones of a single SoC to the
> > > > > device tree.
> > > > > Currently the only control knob we have is the CPU frequency. When any
> > > > > of the sensors on the SoC gets too hot then the only thing we can do is
> > > > > to decrease the CPU frequency. This does not leave much space for
> > > > > configuration in the device tree.
> > > > > What I need to be able is to attach multiple sensors to one thermal
> > > > > zone. The aggregation patch series only partly solves that and I think
> > > > > is inconsistent, but I commented on the series directly.
> > > >
> > > > Any input on this? I really like to get this driver upstream as it is
> > > > currently blocking other Mediatek drivers.
> > >
> > > Hi Eduardo,
> > >
> > > Do you have any comment about Sascha's response ? We really hope get
> > > your comment since Mediatek thermal driver already reviewed in public
> > > over half years, and we have other patches [0] [1] depend on thermal
> > > driver.
> > >
> > > [0]:
> > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-December/394084.html
> > > [1]:
> > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-January/401055.html
> >
> > Friendly ping on the Mediatek thermal driver.
> > The "EFUSE" dependency has now landed in v4.5-rc4.
>
> Actually, it landed in char-misc-next, not v4.5-rc4.
>
> > So, AFAICT, the only thing left that may be blocking landing Mediatek
> > thermal driver is resolution of this discussion about thermal zones.
> > Can we kindly resolve this soon so we have a chance to land it in v4.6.


I think the problem is, that Eduardo wants to see the hierachical 
thermal zones being used. But there is still a discussion ongoing [1].

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7699971/