On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 3:44 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 18/04/2023 15:38, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 1:47 PM Daniel Lezcano > > <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> The ACPI thermal driver creates a link in the thermal zone device > >> sysfs directory pointing to the device sysfs directory. At the same > >> time, it creates a back pointer link from the device to the thermal > >> zone device sysfs directory. > >> > >> From a generic perspective, having a device pointer in the sysfs > >> thermal zone directory may make sense. But the opposite is not true as > >> the same driver can be related to multiple thermal zones. > >> > >> The usage of these information is very specific to ACPI and it is > >> questionable if they are really needed. > >> > >> Let's make the code optional and disable it by default. If it hurts, > >> we will revert this change. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++ > >> drivers/acpi/thermal.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > >> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig > >> index ccbeab9500ec..7df4e18f06ef 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig > >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig > >> @@ -336,6 +336,19 @@ config ACPI_THERMAL > >> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: > >> the module will be called thermal. > >> > >> +config ACPI_THERMAL_SYSFS_ADDON > >> + bool "Enable thermal sysfs addon" > >> + depends on ACPI_THERMAL > >> + def_bool n > >> + help > >> + Enable sysfs extra information added in the thermal zone and > >> + the driver specific sysfs directories. That could be a link > >> + to the associated thermal zone as well as a link pointing to > >> + the device from the thermal zone. By default those are > >> + disabled and are candidate for removal, if you need these > >> + information anyway, enable the option or upgrade the > >> + userspace program using them. > >> + > > > > I don't think that the Kconfig option is appropriate and the help text > > above isn't really helpful. > > I'm sorry, I'm missing something. Don't we want to make these sysfs > extra information optional and disable them by default ? No, I mean no Kconfig option at all for this one at least for now.
