From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pawel Moll Subject: Re: RFC: device thermal limits represented in device tree nodes Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 17:38:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1374770294.3213.35.camel@hornet> References: <51ED40E3.5020703@ti.com> <51EF3186.9060001@wwwdotorg.org> <1374664745.25700.118.camel@hornet> <51EFED19.5090900@ti.com> <1374768928.3213.31.camel@hornet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1374768928.3213.31.camel@hornet> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Eduardo Valentin Cc: Stephen Warren , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , Guenter Roeck , Durgadoss R , "Zhang, Rui" , Wei Ni , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 17:15 +0100, Pawel Moll wrote: > > Another way, as I mentioned in the original RFC, an option would be to > > have the thermal_zone node not embedded in any device node. But them, we > > would need to firmly link it to other device nodes, to describe what is > > monitored and what is used for monitoring. > > You mean the zone nodes would live at the top level of the tree? To my > mind the root represents the device (the board, whatever you call it), What I wanted to say was: ... so the zone would still be embedded in a device node :-) Pawel