On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:29 +0800, Sascha Hauer wrote: > Eduardo, > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 03:19:40PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > Hi Eduardo, > > > > > > > > That should remove the policy of computing the maximum from this driver. > > > Please have a look on the work being done [1] to add grouping and > > > aggregation of thermal zones. With that in place, you should be a matter > > > of configuring the grouping and selecting max as the aggregation function, > > > from the thermal core, instead in the driver. Which should give the > > > system engineer, more flexibility to compose whatever policy based on > > > the exposed sensors. > > > > I think the aggregation of thermal zones is quite useful when it comes > > to putting different chips together to a system. I am not so sure how > > useful it is to expose different thermal zones of a single SoC to the > > device tree. > > Currently the only control knob we have is the CPU frequency. When any > > of the sensors on the SoC gets too hot then the only thing we can do is > > to decrease the CPU frequency. This does not leave much space for > > configuration in the device tree. > > What I need to be able is to attach multiple sensors to one thermal > > zone. The aggregation patch series only partly solves that and I think > > is inconsistent, but I commented on the series directly. > > Any input on this? I really like to get this driver upstream as it is > currently blocking other Mediatek drivers. >
Hi Eduardo, Do you have any comment about Sascha's response ? We really hope get your comment since Mediatek thermal driver already reviewed in public over half years, and we have other patches [0] [1] depend on thermal driver. [0]: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-December/394084.html [1]: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-January/401055.html Regards, Eddie
