Hi Daniel,
-static bool thermal_thresholds_handle_raising(struct list_head *thresholds, int temperature,
- int last_temperature, int *low, int *high)
+static bool thermal_thresholds_handle_dropping(struct list_head *thresholds, int temperature,
+ int last_temperature)
{
struct user_threshold *t;
- list_for_each_entry(t, thresholds, list_node) {
- if (__thermal_threshold_is_crossed(t, temperature, last_temperature,
- THERMAL_THRESHOLD_WAY_UP, low, high))
+ list_for_each_entry_reverse(t, thresholds, list_node) {
+
+ if (!(t->direction & THERMAL_THRESHOLD_WAY_DOWN))
+ continue;
+
+ if (temperature < t->temperature &&
+ last_temperature >= t->temperature)
return true;
Currently WAY_UP notification triggers if temperature is greater than or equal to t-> temperature, but for WAY_DOWN
it is only checking temperature is less than t->temperature. Why don't we include temperature = t->temperature
for WAY_DOWN threshold ? In that case it will be consistent for both WAY_UP and WAY_DOWN notification for userspace.
If we are not considering 'equal to' for WAY_DOWN, there is a possibility of missing WAY_DOWN notification if a sensor
is violated with same WAY_DOWN threshold temperature and only interrupt mode is enabled for that sensor.
}
return false;
}
-static bool thermal_thresholds_handle_dropping(struct list_head *thresholds, int temperature,
- int last_temperature, int *low, int *high)
+static void thermal_threshold_find_boundaries(struct list_head *thresholds, int temperature,
+ int *low, int *high)
{
struct user_threshold *t;
- list_for_each_entry_reverse(t, thresholds, list_node) {
- if (__thermal_threshold_is_crossed(t, temperature, last_temperature,
- THERMAL_THRESHOLD_WAY_DOWN, low, high))
- return true;
+ list_for_each_entry(t, thresholds, list_node) {
+ if (temperature < t->temperature &&
+ (t->direction & THERMAL_THRESHOLD_WAY_UP) &&
+ *high > t->temperature)
+ *high = t->temperature;
}
- return false;
+ list_for_each_entry_reverse(t, thresholds, list_node) {
+ if (temperature > t->temperature &&
+ (t->direction & THERMAL_THRESHOLD_WAY_DOWN) &&
+ *low < t->temperature)
+ *low = t->temperature;
+ }
}
void thermal_thresholds_handle(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int *low, int *high)
@@ -132,6 +134,8 @@ void thermal_thresholds_handle(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int *low, int *hi
lockdep_assert_held(&tz->lock);
+ thermal_threshold_find_boundaries(thresholds, temperature, low, high);
+
/*
* We need a second update in order to detect a threshold being crossed
*/
@@ -151,12 +155,12 @@ void thermal_thresholds_handle(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int *low, int *hi
* - decreased : thresholds are crossed the way down
*/
if (temperature > last_temperature) {
- if (thermal_thresholds_handle_raising(thresholds, temperature,
- last_temperature, low, high))
+ if (thermal_thresholds_handle_raising(thresholds,
+ temperature, last_temperature))
thermal_notify_threshold_up(tz);
} else {
- if (thermal_thresholds_handle_dropping(thresholds, temperature,
- last_temperature, low, high))
+ if (thermal_thresholds_handle_dropping(thresholds,
+ temperature, last_temperature))
thermal_notify_threshold_down(tz);
}
}