RE: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mlxsw: core: Add the hottest thermal zone detection"

[Vadim Pasternak]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, August 5, 2022 7:07 PM
> To: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxx>; rafael@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ido Schimmel <idosch@xxxxxxxxxx>; Petr Machata
> <petrm@xxxxxxxxxx>; Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub
> Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mlxsw: core: Add the hottest thermal zone
> detection"
> 
> 
> Hi Vadim,
> 
> 
> On 04/08/2022 14:21, Vadim Pasternak wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 12:56 PM
> >> To: daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx; rafael@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxx>; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ido Schimmel
> >> <idosch@xxxxxxxxxx>; Petr Machata <petrm@xxxxxxxxxx>; Eric Dumazet
> >> <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo
> Abeni
> >> <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mlxsw: core: Add the hottest thermal
> >> zone detection"
> >>
> >> This reverts commit 6f73862fabd93213de157d9cc6ef76084311c628.
> >>
> >> As discussed in the thread:
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/f3c62ebe-7d59-c537-a010-
> >> bff366c8aeba@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> The revert conflicts with the following changes:
> >>   - 7f4957be0d5b8: thermal: Use mode helpers in drivers
> >>   - 6a79507cfe94c: mlxsw: core: Extend thermal module with per QSFP
> >> module thermal zones
> >>
> >> These conflicts were fixed and the resulting changes are in this patch.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Tested-by: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks for testing
> 
> > Daniel,
> > Could you, please, re-base the patch on top of net-next as Jakub
> mentioned?
> > Or do you want me to do it?
> 
> It is fine, I can do it. The conflict is trivial.
> 
> However, I would have preferred to have the patch in my tree so I can
> continue the consolidation work.
> 
> Is it ok if I pick the patch and the conflict being simple, that can be handle at
> merge time, no?

Hi Daniel,

Sorry for the delay.

Yes, it is OK. There are no plans to make changes in 'core_thermal.c' module
In current cycle, so it should be fine.

Thanks,
Vadim.

> 
> > There is also redundant blank line in this patch:
> >
> 	&mlxsw_thermal_module_ops,
> > +
> >
> 	&mlxsw_thermal_params,
> 
> Yeah, thanks.
> 
> --
> <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