From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A626C43331 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:13:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4142920784 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:13:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585689237; bh=LsFdTC5M5kzZT2QaTM9QajQZZxRaSQDiUQpUvCbzXhA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=lJX+jdGElF77xEChmh2UklYKg1UiNlWeGptwbxhgWvpRCj3/et49JIiT7GVW/Gd+5 l8aFx5yaSucqcJLE5JYumQAhwJS+uKcsoyAJc8r98T5If/ikZ+I9XUlVWM4dr0cWOW zIoKngtNSbeJIngMu2QIQQqdlQQ2kEaTEKfN3A88= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728893AbgCaVNx (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:13:53 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:33792 "EHLO mail-il1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728245AbgCaVNx (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:13:53 -0400 Received: by mail-il1-f194.google.com with SMTP id t11so20949620ils.1; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:13:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4ULdlzKgkks3OW2EmDmbFExkJ0r2q+fNhmp2tVhb4l8=; b=mBMHN3RgIkb2ey/0pcJknlUmKuQaciIUmzkBGREGKheGptj3Yq7lsefvbQCLr1sxcj LXHN/PyxU5WirqyBwVbB+MGzUd5oJ6NXoghPe0+vtSywVSv3rFBLwgkg+is/TcXM2Z1T XE5rbukpgjSAVT8ZFpz9um+0UpRF61kap/JD8e4QpZlMFxZqjQn4Bs4QTqXxcQvXBpXJ laz0Fpp+1i5BIIj4/yZkmEGezJ/lpr+fVd9GGiySU0Ev1zXWa4bwmeo8bPYGMd8HAfss +UY7NtdPFhpx2gF+5ewGPhRUtxxi7rT/HC5KOycS95OM6kgZiD2XSPjTjub1rIn8wNQs 7gNQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3XBkwrLmvJEjocXJevI5ZTEyWvWbAhgF4KaD1UiCXr4dyU0T1i bWzR4e3xdI22pIpTVMElFQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtI4U220QGuNWyV94ZFCn12h5H69QS17f+/gpWqZrqPKyCEIRebwpyd92V6x0A2F+AHZF0ssA== X-Received: by 2002:a92:da4a:: with SMTP id p10mr17457677ilq.34.1585689231749; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:13:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rob-hp-laptop ([64.188.179.250]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f20sm7989ilf.64.2020.03.31.14.13.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (nullmailer pid 29775 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:13:49 -0000 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 15:13:49 -0600 From: Rob Herring To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: Amit Kucheria , Lukasz Luba , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arm-msm , Stephen Boyd , Matthias Kaehlcke , Zhang Rui , Linux PM list , DTML Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dt-bindings: thermal: Add yaml bindings for thermal zones Message-ID: <20200331211349.GA18149@bogus> References: <9c447186008ef2e3f4c3e712458dc0ddcd8a8b03.1585117436.git.amit.kucheria@linaro.org> <81b0cbe1-23c8-b4a3-4775-62e7d6c49b6b@arm.com> <693bda26-1eed-a886-2ce0-7b3a2ca410d2@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <693bda26-1eed-a886-2ce0-7b3a2ca410d2@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 03:07:53PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Hi Amit, > > On 30/03/2020 12:34, Amit Kucheria wrote: > > [ ... ] > > >>> I don't know why it's not consistent with the actual code in > >>> of-thermal.c, where there is even a comment stated: /* For now, > >>> thermal framework supports only 1 sensor per zone */ > >>> > >>> I think this is the place where developers should be informed > >>> about the limitation and not even try to put more sensors into > >>> the list. > >> > >> That is a good point. I'm currently "porting" the existing > >> binding as described in thermal.txt to yaml. If you look at some > >> of the example (c) in there, the bindings allow many sensors to a > >> zone mapping but the thermal core doesn't implement that > >> functionality. > >> > >> So should we fix the core code or change the bindings? Thoughts - > >> Rob, Daniel, Rui? > > > > Rob, Daniel: Any comments? We don't have any concerns for Linux > > backward compatibility since multiple sensors per zone isn't used > > anywhere. But asking since bindings are supposed to be > > OS-agnostic. > > IMO, we should remove it as it is not used anywhere. > > We still have to decide how we aggregate multiple sensors. The schema only needs to pass what currently exists (assuming no errors), so extending it later is fine with me. Rob