On 25/03/2020 07:37, Amit Kucheria wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:43 PM Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 8:22 PM Daniel Lezcano >> <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 09/03/2020 05:54, andy.tang@xxxxxxx wrote: >>>> From: Yuantian Tang <andy.tang@xxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Cooling-maps doesn't have to be a required property because there may >>>> be no cooling device on system, or there are no enough cooling devices for >>>> each thermal zone in multiple thermal zone cases since cooling devices >>>> can't be shared. >>>> So make this property optional to remove such limitations. >>>> >>>> For thermal zones with no cooling-maps, there could be critic trips >>>> that can trigger CPU reset or shutdown. So they still can take actions. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yuantian Tang <andy.tang@xxxxxxx> >> >> Reviewed-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> >>> Amit, I'm about to pick this patch, it will collide with the yaml >>> conversion changes. >> >> Thanks for the headsup. I can fixup v3 when I respin. >> >> However, I've always interpreted this binding as follows: >> - cooling-maps should be mandatory for active and passive trip types >> otherwise there will be no cooling >> - cooling-maps make no sense for critical trip type since we're >> invoking system shutdown >> - cooling-maps are optional for hot trip types. >> >> Is this your understanding too? >> >> We should be able to enforce this in YAML. > > Rui, Daniel, > > What do you think about the above interpretation of the cooling-maps bindings? Yes, I agree with the interpretation. -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
