Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] arm64: dts: rockchip: enable built-in thermal monitoring on RK3588

[Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>]

On 2024-03-01 08:51, Alexey Charkov wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 10:14 AM Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> 
> wrote:
>> On 2024-03-01 06:20, Alexey Charkov wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 1:11 AM Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> wrote:
>> >> See, I'm not a native English speaker, but I've spent a lot of time
>> >> and effort improving my English skills.  Thus, perhaps these comments
>> >> may or may not seem like unnecessary nitpicking, depending on how much
>> >> someone pays attention to writing style in general, but I'll risk to
>> >> be annoying and state these comments anyway. :)
>> >>
>> >> The comment above could be written in a much more condensed form like
>> >> this, which would also be a bit more accurate:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>                                 /* IPA threshold, when IPA governor is
>> >> used */
>> >>
>> >> IOW, we're writing all this for someone to read later, but we should
>> >> (and can) perfectly reasonably expect some already existing background
>> >> knowledge from the readers.  In other words, we should be as concise
>> >> as possible.
>> >
>> > In fact, the power allocation governor code itself doesn't call those
>> > trips threshold or target as your suggested wording would imply.
>> > Instead, it calls them "switch on temperature" and "maximum desired
>> > temperature" [1]. Maybe we can call them that in the comments (and
>> > also avoid calling the governor IPA, because upstream code only calls
>> > it a "power allocator").
>> 
>> Hmm, but "IPA" is still mentioned in exactly three places in the files
>> under drivers/thermal.  I think that warrants the use of "IPA", which
>> is also widely used pretty much everywhere.
>> 
>> Perhaps a win-win would be to have only the very first of the comments
>> like this, to introduce "IPA" as an acronym:
>> 
>>                                    /* Power allocator (IPA) thermal
>> governor       */
>>                                    /* switch-on point, when IPA 
>> governor
>> is used   */
> 
> Yes, good point, thanks!

I'm glad that you agree. :)

>> Next, "the target temperature" is mentioned more than a few times in
>> drivers/thermal/gov_power_allocator.c, which I believe makes the use
>> of "IPA target" perfectly valid.  Actually, let's use "IPA target
>> temperature", if you agree, to make it self descriptive.
> 
> Or perhaps simply "target temperature"? Stepwise governor will also
> use this trip as its target, so it's not IPA specific, unlike the
> switch-on point.

I also had similar thoughts about the shared nature.  I agree, just
"/* target temperature */" would be fine.

>> Finally, the threshold...  Based on
>> drivers/thermal/gov_power_allocator.c,
>> I think "IPA switch-on point" would be a good choice, which I already
>> used above in the proposed opening comment.
> 
> Agreed, that sounds good to me, will reflect in the next iteration.
> Thanks for bringing it up!

Great, thanks!