lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: pm8998: Add thermal zone
Hi David,

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:45 AM, David Collins <collinsd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Hello Matthias,
>
> On 06/29/2018 04:54 PM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:29:55PM -0700, David Collins wrote:
> ...
>>> The PMIC TEMP_ALARM hardware peripheral will perform an automatic partial
>>> PMIC shutdown upon hitting over-temperature stage 2 (125 C). This turns
>>> off peripherals within the PMIC that are expected to draw significant
>>> current. The set of peripherals included varies between PMICs. This
>>> partial shutdown will occur simultaneously with the triggering of an
>>> interrupt to the APPS processor that informs the qcom-spmi-temp-alarm
>>> driver that an over-temperature threshold has been crossed.
>>>
>>> The TEMP_ALARM peripheral will perform an automatic full PMIC shutdown
>>> upon hitting over-temperature stage 3 (145 C). Software won't receive an
>>> interrupt in this case because all power is cut.
>>
>> This information is very useful, thanks David!
>>
>> The (partial) hardware shutdown seems like a good measure of last
>> resort, however I suppose we prefer Linux to initiate a shutdown
>> before losing part of the peripherals (drivers might not be happy
>> about this and probably not revover even when the temperature goes
>> down again) or reach a full PMIC shutdown.
>>
>> Please let me know if there are reasons to prefer to go the hardware
>> limits, it's also an option for device makers to overwrite these
>> settings if they want different behavior.
>
> Disabling stage 3 automatic full PMIC shutdown at 145 C is definitely a
> bad idea. This exists as a last resort in order to save the hardware and
> ensure end user safety in case of excessive temperature even if software
> is locked up.
>
> Disabling stage 2 automatic partial PMIC shutdown at 125 C is not
> recommended as the PMIC is already outside of reasonable operating
> conditions and needs to take corrective action quickly. However, doing so
> may be acceptable if software is taking action to shut down the system
> immediately upon receiving the stage 2 over-temperature interrupt.

Just to confirm: is it expected that at stage 2 the CPU's on the SoC
should continue running even with partial PMIC shutdown enabled? It
sounded to me like partial PMIC shutdown was supposed to shut down
high-power rails that were not essential to the task of performing an
orderly shutdown.

I think Matthias was seeing that when he reached stage 2 and partial
PMIC shutdown happened that the system was just falling on the floor.
...maybe we just have things configured incorrectly?

-Doug
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-15 22:05    [W:0.082 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site