Hi Wolfram, Thanks for your feedback. On 2017-03-07 20:52:03 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:03:56PM +0100, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > > If the memory resource for a TSC is unviable probe should fail not try > > to go ahead with the remaining TSC. This fix is aligned with other > > checks in probe where probe fails if they are unavailable. > > > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I disagree. There are likely SoCs in the future which have less than > TSC_MAX_NUM sensors (V3M shall have only 1 according to chapter 10C in > v0.52 documentation). So, the code exits the loop for this case. We > should move it before the devm_kzalloc(), however. Ahh I did not think of that. I will drop this patch and instead do as you suggest move this before the devm_kzalloc(). > > That also means that you can't really iterate over TSC_MAX_NUM in later > patches, but rather store the amount of instances in the main struct and > iterate over that value. > I will see how to best solve this, probably we need then to recoded in struct rcar_gen3_thermal_priv how many zones are in use so we can iterate over all active zones. -- Regards, Niklas Söderlund
