From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: move thermal trip handling to generic thermal layer Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:59:04 +0000 Message-ID: <20081208125904.GA31976@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20081127174813.GA24258@srcf.ucam.org> <20081127174956.GB24258@srcf.ucam.org> <20081203175532.GA20770@srcf.ucam.org> <1228719540.7929.141.camel@rzhang-dt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:60398 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751703AbYLHM7S (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2008 07:59:18 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1228719540.7929.141.camel@rzhang-dt> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Zhang Rui Cc: "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "Thomas, Sujith" On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 02:59:00PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 01:55 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > The ACPI code currently carries its own thermal trip handling, meaning that > > any other thermal implementation will need to reimplement it. Move the code > > to the generic thermal layer. > > > Are these ACPI stuffs generic enough to be ported to the generic thermal > driver? > e.g. the tc1, tc2, tsp, they are mentioned in the ACPI spec, > so my question is if the thermal zones than ACPI still have these > concepts? They're needed if you want to implement any sort of sensible implementation of passive cooling. They might not be expressed in quite the same way, but the basic concept is identical.