Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 2 authors, 2021-06-21

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] hwmon: Support set_trips() of thermal device ops

From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-06-21 20:45:42
Also in: linux-hwmon, linux-pm, lkml

21.06.2021 23:30, Guenter Roeck пишет:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 09:40:58PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
quoted
Support set_trips() callback of thermal device ops. This allows HWMON
device to operatively notify thermal core about temperature changes, which
is very handy to have in a case where HWMON sensor is used by CPU thermal
zone that performs passive cooling and emergency shutdown on overheat.
Thermal core will be able to react faster to temperature changes.
I think that warrants an explanation why it doesn't matter if the
code doesn't really set any trip points.
I'll extend the commit message.
quoted
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/hwmon/hwmon.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/hwmon.c b/drivers/hwmon/hwmon.c
index fd47ab4e6892..e74dc81e650d 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/hwmon.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/hwmon.c
@@ -153,8 +153,40 @@ static int hwmon_thermal_get_temp(void *data, int *temp)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static int hwmon_thermal_set_trips(void *data, int low, int high)
+{
+	struct hwmon_thermal_data *tdata = data;
+	struct hwmon_device *hwdev = to_hwmon_device(tdata->dev);
+	const struct hwmon_chip_info *chip = hwdev->chip;
+	const struct hwmon_channel_info **info = chip->info;
+	unsigned int i;
+
+	if (!chip->ops->write)
+		return 0;
+
+	for (i = 1; info[i] && info[i]->type != hwmon_temp; i++)
+		continue;
Why start with index 1 ? While index 0 is commonly used for chip data,
that is not mandatory.
This is borrowed from hwmon_thermal_register_sensors().
quoted
+
+	if (info[i] && info[i]->config[tdata->index] & HWMON_T_MIN) {
+		int err = chip->ops->write(tdata->dev, hwmon_temp,
+					   hwmon_temp_min, tdata->index, low);
checkpatch will complain here because it expects an empty line after a
declaration. Since err is used in multiple conditionals, I would suggest
to declare it once in the function header.
Okay, although checkpatch is happy.

./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict v3*
---------------------------------------------------------------
v3-0001-hwmon-lm90-Prevent-integer-underflows-of-temperat.patch
---------------------------------------------------------------
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 27 lines checked

v3-0001-hwmon-lm90-Prevent-integer-underflows-of-temperat.patch has no
obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
-----------------------------------------------------------
v3-0002-hwmon-Support-set_trips-of-thermal-device-ops.patch
-----------------------------------------------------------
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 40 lines checked
quoted
+		if (err < 0 && err != -EOPNOTSUPP)
"< 0" is unnecessary.
quoted
+			return err;
+	}
+
+	if (info[i] && info[i]->config[tdata->index] & HWMON_T_MAX) {
+		int err = chip->ops->write(tdata->dev, hwmon_temp,
+					   hwmon_temp_max, tdata->index, high);
+		if (err < 0 && err != -EOPNOTSUPP)
"< 0" is unnecessary.
I'll remove it in v4.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help