Hi Javi,

Sorry for late response.

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 11:10:52AM +0000, Javi Merino wrote:

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 12:55:59PM -0800, Eduardo Valentin wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:57:43PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

The property "hysteresis" is mandatory for trip points, so if without
it the thermal zone cannot register successfully. But "hysteresis" is
ignored in the thermal subsystem and only inquired by several thermal
sensor drivers.

If the Linux thermal subsystem has a problem with handling hysteresis, I
would rather fix Linux code than relaxing the DT binding. Or if you
still believe hysteresis is really optional, I would prefer to see a
better justification than "Linux ignores it".

I see it the other way round, Is hysteresis a property that, without
it, the thermal code can't configure itself so it fails to create the
trip point?  The current code goes "There is no hysteresis for this
property, I don't know how to set up this trip point!".  I think we
can do better than this.

Do you agree with Javi's suggestion? If you think it's okay, I will
move on to send out a new version patch based on Javi's comments.

No I don't. This discussion so far has been about Linux code. I still
havent seen an argument explaining why hysteresis has to be optional.

Fair enough.  Looks like I'm holding this driver from being
upstreamed, so I'll back off.

Leo, sorry for misguiding you.  Please bring back the hysteresis
property you had in v1.

Not at all. I will add back hysteresis property and resend new patches.

Thanks,
Leo Yan