lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/3] thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework
On Thursday 18 Apr 2019 at 09:23:23 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 17-04-19, 10:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > static struct thermal_cooling_device *
> > __cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node *np,
> > - struct cpufreq_policy *policy, u32 capacitance)
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > + struct em_perf_domain *em)
> > {
>
> > + if (em_is_sane(cpufreq_cdev, em)) {
> > + cpufreq_cdev->em = em;
> > cooling_ops = &cpufreq_power_cooling_ops;
> > - } else {
> > + } else if (policy->freq_table_sorted != CPUFREQ_TABLE_UNSORTED) {
> > cooling_ops = &cpufreq_cooling_ops;
> > + } else {
> > + WARN(1, "cpu_cooling: no valid frequency table found\n");
>
> Well the frequency table is valid, isn't it ?

True ...

> Maybe something like: "cpu_cooling doesn't support unsorted frequency tables" ?

Right, otherwise I guess that could be confused with the check on
cpu_table_count_valid_entries() above. And while I'm thinking about it
perhaps WARN is a bit too much here ? We can handle the error safely so
pr_err() should be enough ?

Thanks,
Quentin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-18 10:05    [W:0.088 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site