Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Jan 2023 11:08:04 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 4/4] thermal: mediatek: add another get_temp ops for thermal sensors | From | Amjad Ouled-Ameur <> |
| |
Hi Daniel,
On 1/19/23 18:03, Amjad Ouled-Ameur wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 12/29/22 16:49, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 06/12/2022 10:18, Amjad Ouled-Ameur wrote: >>> Hi Daniel, >>> On Mon Dec 5, 2022 at 8:39 PM CET, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Amjad, >>>> >>>> >>>> On 05/12/2022 11:41, Amjad Ouled-Ameur wrote: >>>> >>>> [ ... ] >>>> >>>>>>> @@ -1161,11 +1197,24 @@ static int mtk_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>>>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, mt); >>>>>>> - tzdev = devm_thermal_of_zone_register(&pdev->dev, 0, mt, >>>>>>> - &mtk_thermal_ops); >>>>>>> - if (IS_ERR(tzdev)) { >>>>>>> - ret = PTR_ERR(tzdev); >>>>>>> - goto err_disable_clk_peri_therm; >>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < mt->conf->num_sensors + 1; i++) { >>>>>>> + tz = devm_kmalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*tz), GFP_KERNEL); >>>>>>> + if (!tz) >>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM; >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + tz->mt = mt; >>>>>>> + tz->id = i; >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + tzdev = devm_thermal_of_zone_register(&pdev->dev, i, tz, (i == 0) ? >>>>>>> + &mtk_thermal_ops : >>>>>>> + &mtk_thermal_sensor_ops); >>>>>> >>>>>> Here you use again the aggregation >>>>> I addressed this concern in V6, could you please take a look and let me >>>>> know what you think [0]. >>>>> >>>>> [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/5eb0cdc2-e9f9-dd42-bf80-b7dcd8bcc196@baylibre.com/ >>>> >>>> May I misunderstanding but AFAICS, this patch is setting the >>>> mtk_thermal_ops if the sensor id is zero. The get_temp is computing the >>>> max temperature in this ops which is what we don't want to do. >>> >>> Correct, but I think that is out of scope of this patchset, as the current >>> driver already uses mtk_thermal_ops for sensor 0. The focus of this patchset >>> is to add support for the other sensors. >>> >>> Besides, what do you suggest as a clean implementation if the current one >>> no longer meets thermal core requirements ? >> >> IIUC, there is a sensor per couple of cores. 1 x 2Bigs, 1 x 2Bigs, 1 x 4 Little, right ? > > MT8365 SoC has 4 x A53 CPUs. The SoC has 4 thermal zones per sensor. Thermal zone 0 corresponds > > to all 4 x A53 CPUs, the other thermal zones (1, 2 and 3) has nothing to do with CPUs. The cooling device type > > used for CPUs is passive. FYI, thermal zones 1, 2 and 3 are present in the SoC for debug-purpose only, they are not supposed > > to be used for production. > After reconsidering the fact that zones 1, 2 and 3 are only used for dev/debug, it might be best to avoid
aggregation as you suggested, and keep only support for zone 0 in this driver. Thus I suggest I send a V8
where I keep only below fixes for this patch if that's okay with you:
- Define "raw_to_mcelsius" function pointer for "struct thermal_bank_cfg".
- Fix "mtk_thermal" variable in mtk_read_temp().
- Set "mt->raw_to_mcelsius" in probe().
For zones 1, 2 and 3 we can later add a different driver specific for dev/debug to probe them to
avoid confusion.
Regards,
Amjad
> > Regards, > > Amjad > >> >> If it is the case, then a thermal zone per sensor with the trip points and a cooling device for each of them. >> >> The two thermal zones for the big will share the same cooling device. The little thermal zone will have its own cooling device. >> >> If there is the GPU, then its own cooling device also with devfreq. >> >> >>>> <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 >>> >>
| |