On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 9:50 AM Wilczynski, Michal <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 5/30/2023 5:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Drop the ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_DEVICES symbol which is redundant, because > > ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES can be used directly instead of it without any > > drawbacks and rename the ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_THRESHOLDS to > > ACPI_TRIPS_THRESHOLDS to make the code a bit more consistent. > > > > While at it, fix up some formatting white space used in the symbol > > definitions. > > > > No functional impact. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/thermal.c | 13 ++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/thermal.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/thermal.c > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/thermal.c > > @@ -238,12 +238,11 @@ static int acpi_thermal_set_cooling_mode > > #define ACPI_TRIPS_ACTIVE BIT(3) > > #define ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES BIT(4) > > > > -#define ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_THRESHOLDS (ACPI_TRIPS_PASSIVE | ACPI_TRIPS_ACTIVE) > > -#define ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_DEVICES ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES > > +#define ACPI_TRIPS_THRESHOLDS (ACPI_TRIPS_PASSIVE | ACPI_TRIPS_ACTIVE) > > > > -#define ACPI_TRIPS_INIT (ACPI_TRIPS_CRITICAL | ACPI_TRIPS_HOT | \ > > - ACPI_TRIPS_PASSIVE | ACPI_TRIPS_ACTIVE | \ > > - ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES) > > +#define ACPI_TRIPS_INIT (ACPI_TRIPS_CRITICAL | ACPI_TRIPS_HOT | \ > > + ACPI_TRIPS_PASSIVE | ACPI_TRIPS_ACTIVE | \ > > + ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES) > > > > /* > > * This exception is thrown out in two cases: > > @@ -906,13 +905,13 @@ static void acpi_thermal_notify(struct a > > acpi_queue_thermal_check(tz); > > break; > > case ACPI_THERMAL_NOTIFY_THRESHOLDS: > > - acpi_thermal_trips_update(tz, ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_THRESHOLDS); > > + acpi_thermal_trips_update(tz, ACPI_TRIPS_THRESHOLDS); > > acpi_queue_thermal_check(tz); > > acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(device->pnp.device_class, > > dev_name(&device->dev), event, 0); > > break; > > case ACPI_THERMAL_NOTIFY_DEVICES: > > - acpi_thermal_trips_update(tz, ACPI_TRIPS_REFRESH_DEVICES); > > + acpi_thermal_trips_update(tz, ACPI_TRIPS_DEVICES); > > acpi_queue_thermal_check(tz); > > acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(device->pnp.device_class, > > dev_name(&device->dev), event, 0); > > > > Looks good to me, > > Reviewed-by: Michal Wilczynski <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> > > Also I wonder, whether I should wait with another revision of my patchset 'Remove .notify', since it will > obviously need to be rebased on top of that changes. No need to wait, I can deal with merge conflicts just fine.
