From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] thermal:cpu cooling:tegra: Provide deferred probing for tegra driver Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 12:57:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20141117115743.GG25699@ulmo> References: <1411547232-21493-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <1415898165-27406-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <1415898165-27406-6-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <5465DDC5.6090301@kapsi.fi> <20141114122437.6742ea68@amdc2363> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="V32M1hWVjliPHW+c" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141114122437.6742ea68@amdc2363> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lukasz Majewski Cc: Mikko Perttunen , Eduardo Valentin , Zhang Rui , Ezequiel Garcia , Kuninori Morimoto , Linux PM list , Vincenzo Frascino , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Lukasz Majewski , Nobuhiro Iwamatsu , Mikko Perttunen , Stephen Warren , Alexandre Courbot , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --V32M1hWVjliPHW+c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:24:37PM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > Hi Mikko, >=20 > > Tested-by: Mikko Perttunen >=20 > Thanks for testing. >=20 > >=20 > > One potential issue I can see is that if the cpufreq driver fails to=20 > > probe then you'll never get the thermal driver either. For example,=20 > > Tegra124 currently has no cpufreq driver, so if CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL > > was enabled, then the soctherm driver would never be able to probe. >=20 > Yes, this is a potential issue. However, this option in tegra_defconfig > is by default disabled when thermal is enabled. Not everybody uses tegra_defconfig for their kernel builds. In fact I'd imagine that the majority of kernels use a variant of multi_v7_defconfig and therefore CPU_THERMAL might get enabled irrespective of any Tegra support. I think a better solution would be to add this check only when proper support for CPU frequency based cooling is added. That is, when a call to cpufreq_cooling_register() (or a variant thereof) is added. But while at it, why not make it so that cpufreq_cooling_register() detects if a cpufreq driver has been registered yet and propagate -EPROBE_DEFER if necessary? Thierry --V32M1hWVjliPHW+c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUaeK3AAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhc9YP/1Z+eoCMOIhl1S9h2NW3KgUn uFOm7ZQAe3eqUyWeRW5intBYSlkEMeQ8Xb1zjY5yZStehNa/MMW7TLfTCDa1NbQl 5NO5G4jBD+yY/AXZx9szFkJAa0mhnhJMKQ01DPvczgj9JwK8qiS1YmfRGMt4cKE0 FhG7S3sm5Q7isyyJ59TBD+izUELEY6SYgCF9H+Z3AtLDWdDM2UwniL46wo7dMsn7 Xukux/IXuYS18QBsFQCJhVip9w31D7H8gfs6ucT97FuXSXxAIfGOLQqJqyIY2hH0 lMAjb6dT/01eDWQRs2sX52jQmjUw5nu4fypCIoe0eJAG56uE0cp0F3WUzotVYVCZ 5oREgjJ2SBbSvDEa8yrFsn2pT8Ccm1m2fZrAPMWzAmB31JOrVULS7G4d7YtUEIiS x5CZPTp7j2v2SMOO0P0OmvuxuwuiBiHra3uZVD1usdvh95WkZe49BXsoKYig4Sva WiATqJXCN06CCUgFOmP3qORJiAZfEh0TavTnreyfB390tWpWhX4j52Toacw2PU35 MT7H5NpnV4O5anjU0PdtJycQ+2cCMVWZ5mAw0PtUID092nSPLu9GIbRfmXVihQ9E krJeDHnlYp8/47fnRKyworyquGYTIi0gL3RyDY2vPIb6Zjxk+41YT7Q5zK4TkxIv V4smEiRHLt93j/FDRN4C =nWc+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --V32M1hWVjliPHW+c--