Hi Rui, > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi- > > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eduardo Valentin > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:10 AM > > > To: R, Durgadoss > > > Cc: lenb@xxxxxxxxxx; Zhang, Rui; rjw@xxxxxxx; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; eduardo.valentin@xxxxxx; > > > amit.kachhap@xxxxxxxxxx; wni@xxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] Thermal: Platform layer changes to provide > > > thermal data > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 06:16:05PM +0530, Durgadoss R wrote: > > > > This patch shows how can we add platform specific thermal data > > > > required by the thermal framework. This is just an example > > > > patch, and _not_ for merge. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Durgadoss R <durgadoss.r@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c | 42 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c > > > b/arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c > > > > index fd41a92..0440db5 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c > > > > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ > > > > #include <linux/mfd/intel_msic.h> > > > > #include <linux/gpio.h> > > > > #include <linux/i2c/tc35876x.h> > > > > +#include <linux/thermal.h> > > > > > > > > #include <asm/setup.h> > > > > #include <asm/mpspec_def.h> > > > > @@ -78,6 +79,30 @@ struct sfi_rtc_table_entry > > > sfi_mrtc_array[SFI_MRTC_MAX]; > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sfi_mrtc_array); > > > > int sfi_mrtc_num; > > > > > > > > +#define MRST_THERMAL_ZONES 3 > > > > +struct thermal_zone_params tzp[MRST_THERMAL_ZONES] = { > > > > + { .thermal_zone_name = "CPU", > > > > + .throttle_policy = THERMAL_FAIR_SHARE, > > > > + .num_cdevs = 2, > > > > + .cdevs_name = {"CPU", "Battery"}, > > > > + .trip_mask = {0x0F, 0x08}, > > > > + .weights = {80, 20}, }, > > > > + > > > > + { .thermal_zone_name = "Battery", > > > > + .throttle_policy = THERMAL_FAIR_SHARE, > > > > + .num_cdevs = 1, > > > > + .cdevs_name = {"Battery"}, > > > > + .trip_mask = {0x0F}, > > > > + .weights = {100}, }, > > > > + > > > > + { .thermal_zone_name = "Skin", > > > > + .throttle_policy = THERMAL_FAIR_SHARE, > > > > + .num_cdevs = 2, > > > > + .cdevs_name = {"Display", "Battery"}, > > > > + .trip_mask = {0x0F, 0x0F}, > > > > + .weights = {50, 50}, } > > > > > > Please consider the comment I sent on your data definition and also the > > > comment I made on this patch on your RFC series. > > > > Yes.. I don't know why/how I missed it. > > Also, saw the same comment on one of the other patches also. > > > > Will surely fix this thing in v2. > > > > BTW, any suggestion for the 'name' of that structure ? :-) > > hmmm, > do we still have thermal_zone_platforms in patch v2? > I do not think we need this if we only bind devices via .bind() > callback. We can bind devices via .bind call back, and that will take some load off the framework code. But even then, we would need this structure right ? Say, when we obtain platform data from a thermal driver, it should know 'what format the platform data is' ..correct ? I theoretically agree with you that individual platform drivers can have data in their own format, but that will be a heavy loss on standardization. So, I will remove the extra bind code I added to framework, and (keep it the old way it was) but still prefer to have the structure put in thermal.h. Thanks, Durga ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
