Re: [PATCH 2/3] thermal: Add Mediatek thermal controller support

From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>,
	Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@mediatek.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] thermal: Add Mediatek thermal controller support
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 11:56:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160218105603.GE3939@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56C4A875.6080908@gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 06:05:57PM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 15/02/16 03:14, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>Hi Eduardo, Sascha,
> >>
> >>>>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
> >>
> >>Friendly ping on the Mediatek thermal driver.
> >>The "EFUSE" dependency has now landed in v4.5-rc4.
> >
> >Actually, it landed in char-misc-next, not v4.5-rc4.
> >
> >>So, AFAICT, the only thing left that may be blocking landing Mediatek
> >>thermal driver is resolution of this discussion about thermal zones.
> >>Can we kindly resolve this soon so we have a chance to land it in v4.6.
> >>
> 
> 
> I think the problem is, that Eduardo wants to see the hierachical thermal
> zones being used. But there is still a discussion ongoing [1].

It seems the original Author lost interest in the hierarchical thermal
zones. I am not convinced that we need hierarchical thermal zones for
the Mediatek driver since from the five sensors we only need the maximum
temperature (If this ever changes we could still rework it).

Given the current speed of communication I am not willing to add
another, possibly controversal, dependency to an otherwise simple
driver. I am even less willing when concerns like these come after *v12*
of this series.

Eduardo, it would really help to get a word from you.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |