On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 11:09 -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote:

Hello

On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 01:35:31PM +0200, Heiko St?bner wrote:

quoted

Am Dienstag, 9. September 2014, 10:27:17 schrieb Zhang Rui:

quoted

On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 09:02 +0800, Caesar Wang wrote:

quoted

? 2014?09?03? 16:07, Heiko St?bner ??:

quoted

Am Mittwoch, 3. September 2014, 10:10:37 schrieb Caesar Wang:

quoted

This add the necessary binding documentation for the thermal
found on Rockchip SoCs

Signed-off-by: zhaoyifeng <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <redacted>
---

  .../devicetree/bindings/thermal/rockchip-thermal.txt | 20

++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)

  create mode 100644

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/rockchip-thermal.txt

diff --git
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/rockchip-thermal.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/rockchip-thermal.txt new
file
mode 100644
index 0000000..1ed4d4c

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/rockchip-thermal.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+* Temperature Sensor ADC (TSADC) on rockchip SoCs
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible: "rockchip,rk3288-tsadc"
+- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory

mapped
+       region.
+- interrupts: The interrupt number to the cpu. The interrupt specifier
format +	      depends on the interrupt controller.
+- clocks: Must contain an entry for each entry in clock-names.
+- clock-names: Shall be "tsadc" for the converter-clock, and
"apb_pclk" for +	       the peripheral clock.

You're using the passive-temp, critical-temp and force-shut-temp
properties in your driver without declaring them here.

frankly,the about are need be declared. but  there are 4 types[0] for
trip in thermal framework,
there is no force-shut for me. So I want to change it three additional
properties in [PATCH V4 4/4],


[0]
{

     THERMAL_TRIP_CRITICAL,
     THERMAL_TRIP_HOT,
     THERMAL_TRIP_PASSIVE,
     THERMAL_TRIP_ACTIVE,

}

this sounds reasonable to me.

quoted

quoted

But more importantly, please use the generic trip-points for this. I
guess it shouldn't be a problem to introduce a "forced-shutdown"
trippoint [0] for the additional trip-point you have - thermal
maintainers, please shout if I'm wrong :-)

what is the difference between a critical trip point and a
"forced-shutdown" trip point?
Thermal core will do a shutdown in case the critical trip point is
triggered.

The forced-shutdown is where the thermal controller is supposed to also do a 

Currently, there is no discrimination between hardware configured /
triggered thermal shutdown and software detected / triggered thermal shutdown.
One way to implement it though is to reuse the critical trip type. Even
if you use more than one trip type it is doable, it will depend on the
priorities you give to software triggered and hardware triggered.

quoted

shutdown in hardware. As you said the thermal core will also shutdown at the 
critical trip point, I guess we could map Caesar's value like

trip-point		tsadc
critical		forced-shutdown (the 120 degrees in patch 4)

quoted

hot			critical (the 100 degrees)
...

In the case we are planing to expand the trip type range, adding one
specific to hardware configurable shutdown makes sense to me too.

hmmm, why? you don't want an orderly shutdown? I still do not understand
why we need a hardware shutdown trip point.
Say, if we expect the system to be shutdown at 100C, I don't think we
have a chance to trigger the hardware shutdown trip point.
Further more, if my understanding is right, thermal core won't do
anything for the hardware shutdown trip point because the system will be
shutdown automatically, right? If this is true, why bother introducing
this to thermal core?

thanks,
rui

Alhtough, as I mention, I believe with the current generic trip types,
this situation can be covered already.
 Besides, I believe
'forced-shutdown' does not sound a descriptive enough though. I would
suggest something more specific, say 'hardware-shutdown'. 

quoted

quoted

thanks,
rui

quoted

It's a good option.
I can send a patch,but I don't know whether the thermal maintainers will
accept it.

Maybe,they have a better way to suggest it.:-)


PS:I will sent a new patch If I still have no received their suggestions
in two days.

quoted

Heiko


[0] in a separate patch, changing
- thermal_trip_type enum in include/linux/thermal.h
- trip_types mapping in drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c
- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/thermal.txt

quoted

+
+Example:
+tsadc: tsadc at ff280000 {
+	compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-tsadc";
+	reg = <0xff280000 0x100>;
+	interrupts = <GIC_SPI 37 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+	clocks = <&cru SCLK_TSADC>, <&cru PCLK_TSADC>;
+	clock-names = "tsadc", "apb_pclk";
+};