On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 21:46:11 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <r...@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> ATM, I'm tempted to do something like the patch below (with the rationale > that it shouldn't be necessary to read the temperature right after updating > the trip points if polling is in use, because the next update through polling > will cause it to be read anyway and it will trigger trip point actions as > needed). > > Stephen, can you give it a go, please? On Sat, 02 Jan 2021 12:03:17 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <r...@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > There is one more way to address this, probably better: instead of checking > the > temperature right away in acpi_thermal_notify(), queue that on > acpi_thermal_pm_queue > and so only if another thermal check is not pending. > > This way there will be at most one temperature check coming from > acpi_thermal_notify() queued up at any time which should prevent the > build-up of work items from taking place. > > So something like this: Thanks for the patches. I'll try them as soon as I can. Steve Berman
