From: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
To: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>
Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
<nm@ti.com>, <t-kristo@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: core: Add a back up thermal shutdown mechanism
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:48:29 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5bf20f10-4c8e-e864-623e-efeaca696351@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170412040542.GA11305@localhost.localdomain>
On Wednesday 12 April 2017 09:35 AM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Keerthy,
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 09:09:36AM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday 12 April 2017 08:50 AM, Zhang Rui wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 08:19 +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 11 April 2017 10:59 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:00:20PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> off).
>
> <cut>
>
>>>>> OK... This seams to me, still a corner case supposed to be fixed at
>>>>> orderly_power_off, not at thermal. But..
>>>>>
>
> ^^^ Then again, this must be fixed not at thermal core. And re-reading
> the history of this thread, this seams to be really something broken at
> OMAP/DRA7, as mentioned in previous messages. That is probably why you
> are pushing for pm_power_off(), which seams to be the one that works for
> you, pulling the plug correctly (DRA7).
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, there is no clean way of detecting such failure of
>>>>>> userspace
>>>>>> powering off the system. In such scenarios, it is necessary for a
>>>>>> backup
>>>>>> workqueue to be able to force a shutdown of the system when
>>>>>> orderly
>>>>>> shutdown is not successful after a configurable time period.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Given that system running hot is a thermal issue, I guess we care
>>>>> more
>>>>> on this matter then..
>>>> Yes!
>>>>
>>> I just read this thread again https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/802458
>>> 1/ to recall the previous discussion.
>>>
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8149891/
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8149861/
>>> should be the solution made based on Ingo' suggestion, right?
>>>
>>> And to me, this sounds like the right direction to go, thermal does not
>>> need a back up shutdown solution, it just needs a kernel function call
>>> which guarantees the system can be shutdown/reboot immediately.
>>>
>>> is there any reason that patch 1/2 is not accepted?
>>
>> Zhang,
>>
>> http://www.serverphorums.com/read.php?12,1400964
>>
>> I got a NAK from Alan and was given this direction on a thermal_poweroff
>> which is more or less what is done in this patch.
>>
>
>
> Actually, Alan's suggestion is more for you to define a
> thermal_poweroff() that can be defined per architecture.
>
> Also, please, keep track of your patch versions and also do copy
> everybody who has stated their opinion on previous discussions. These
> patches must have Ingo, Alan, and RMK copied too. In this way we avoid
> loosing track of what has been suggested and we also converge faster to
> something everybody (or most of us) agree. Next version, please, fix
> that.
Sure. This was resurrected from last year. I will add the links to
previous discussions. my bad.
>
>
> To me, thermal core needs a function that simply powers off the system.
> No timeouts, delayed works, backups, etc. Simple and straight.
You mean replacing orderly_power_off during critical trip point cross
over with a thermal specific thermal_poweroff function that ensures
that hardware is indeed shut off?
>
> The idea of having a per architecture implementation, as per Alan's
> suggestion, makes sense to me too. Having something different from
> pm_power_off(), specific to thermal, might also give the opportunity to
> save the power off reason.
I did not get the 'save the power off reason' point. Care to explain more?
>
> BR,
>
> Eduardo Valentin
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-12 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-31 6:30 [PATCH] thermal: core: Add a back up thermal shutdown mechanism Keerthy
2017-04-11 17:29 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 2:49 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 3:20 ` Zhang Rui
2017-04-12 3:39 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 4:05 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 4:18 ` Keerthy [this message]
2017-04-12 7:55 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 8:26 ` Zhang Rui
2017-04-12 8:36 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 8:45 ` Zhang Rui
2017-04-12 15:44 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 16:16 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 16:50 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 16:31 ` Grygorii Strashko
2017-04-12 16:34 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 16:44 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 16:54 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 17:07 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 17:08 ` Grygorii Strashko
2017-04-12 17:11 ` Keerthy
2017-04-12 17:24 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 18:43 ` Tero Kristo
2017-04-13 3:50 ` Keerthy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5bf20f10-4c8e-e864-623e-efeaca696351@ti.com \
--to=j-keerthy@ti.com \
--cc=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).