On 10/07/2020 15:51, Thara Gopinath wrote: > Thermal framework today supports monitoring for rising temperatures and > subsequently initiating cooling action in case of a thermal trip point > being crossed. There are scenarios where a SoC need some warming action to > be activated if the temperature falls below a cetain permissible limit. > Since warming action can be considered mirror opposite of cooling action, > most of the thermal framework can be re-used to achieve this. > > This patch series is yet another attempt to add support for monitoring > falling temperature in thermal framework. Unlike the first attempt[1] > (where a new property was added to thermal trip point binding to indicate > direction of temperature monitoring), this series introduces a new trip > point type (THERMAL_TRIP_COLD) to indicate a trip point at which falling > temperature monitoring must be triggered. This patch series uses Daniel > Lezcano's recently added thermal genetlink interface[2] to notify userspace > of falling temperature and rising temperature at the cold trip point. This > will enable a user space engine to trigger the relevant mitigation for > falling temperature. At present, no support is added to any of the thermal > governors to monitor and mitigate falling temperature at the cold trip > point;rather all governors return doing nothing if triggered for a cold > trip point. As future extension, monitoring of falling temperature can be > added to the relevant thermal governor. I agree we need a cold trip point in order to introduce the functioning temperature range in the thermal framework. Rui, what is your opinion ? -- <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
