Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] of: thermal: Fixed governor at each thermal zone | From | Zhang Rui <> | Date | Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:30:40 +0800 |
| |
Hi, Javi, Lukasz and Eduardo,
thanks for your input.
thanks, rui
On 二, 2016-09-27 at 06:22 -0700, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > Hello, Lukasz, Inhyuk, Javi, > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:52:04PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > > > > > On 27/09/16 02:46, Zhang Rui wrote: > > > > > > On 一, 2016-09-19 at 10:18 +0900, Inhyuk Kang wrote: > > > > > > > > It is necessary to be added governor at each thermal_zone. > > > > Because some governors should be operated in the during the > > > > kernel > > > > booting > > > > in order to avoid heating problem. > > > > > > > > Default governor cannot be covered all thermal zones policy > > > > because > > > > some thermal zones want to apply different one. > > > > For example, the power allocator governor operates differently > > > > with > > > > step wise governor. > > > > Hence, it is better to parse governor parameter from the device > > > > tree. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Inhyuk Kang <hugh.kang@lge.com> > > > > > > > The patch looks okay to me. > > > Eduardo, what do you think of this patch? > > Hi Rui, > > > > Beside the fact which Javi pointed out in his email, there is an > > issue in > > the patch itself. > > The idea behind the patch is good, but the patch should have some > > improvements, i.e: > > - strncpy instead of strcpy, > > - if the governor name is not found in the registered governor's > > list by > > __find_governor (and then null is set) we should probably switch to > > default > > governor, > > - add DT documentation, > Also, the idea of the patch is good, almost tempting to do it, but > unfortunately, not acceptable from DT perspective. The patch > infringes > two of the DT conceptual and design decision of: > (a) DT should describe hardware, not policy; > (b) DT should describe hardware, not OS specific implementations. > > As already pointed by Javi, this patch has already been proposed > (more > than one time by different people), but, it still continues to be > unacceptable. > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Regards, > > Lukasz > >
| |