Re: [PATCH] thermal: of: Fix logic in thermal_of_should_bind

[Lukasz Luba]

Hi Rafael,

On 2/20/25 20:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:40 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 8:06 AM Yu-Che Cheng <giver@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > The current thermal_of_should_bind will stop iterating cooling-maps on
> > > the first matched trip point, leading to subsequent cooling devices
> > > binding to the same trip point failing to find the cooling spec.
> > >
> > > The iteration should continue enumerating subsequent cooling-maps if the
> > > target cooling device is not found.
> > >
> > > Fix the logic to break only when a matched cooling device is found.
> >
> > OK, but ->
> >
> > > Fixes: 94c6110b0b13 ("thermal/of: Use the .should_bind() thermal zone callback")
> > > Signed-off-by: Yu-Che Cheng <giver@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/thermal/thermal_of.c | 3 ++-
> > >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_of.c b/drivers/thermal/thermal_of.c
> > > index 5ab4ce4daaeb..69c530e38574 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_of.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_of.c
> > > @@ -312,7 +312,8 @@ static bool thermal_of_should_bind(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
> > >                                  break;
> >
> > -> I'd prefer to do a jump from here, that is
> >
> > -                                 break;
> > +                                goto put_cm_np;
> > >                  }
> > >
> > > -               break;
> >
> > and remove the break statement above altogether.
> >
> > > +               if (result)
> > > +                       break;
> > >          }
> >
> > And of course the label needs to be added too:
> >
> > +put_cm_np:
> > >          of_node_put(cm_np);
> > >
> > > ---
>
> Or even, to avoid adding a new label, move the loop from
> thermal_of_should_bind() into a new function that will be called by it
> do carry out the cooling-maps lookup, like in the attached patch.
>
> Can you check if it works for you, please?


I have experimented with your proposed patch with my DT setup.
It looks OK to me and much more clean.

If you have any super-edge-case scenario DT config to try, please let me
know. I will try to create such on my end...

If you would like to go forward with your patch, feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@xxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@xxxxxxx>

Regards,
Lukasz