[PATCH v3] thermal: core: Add sanity checks for polling_delay and passive_delay

[PATCH v3] thermal: core: Add sanity checks for polling_delay and passive_delay

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

If polling_delay is nonzero and passive_delay is greater than
polling_delay, the thermal zone temperature will be updated less
often when tz->passive is nonzero, which is not as expected.  Make
the thermal zone registration fail with -EINVAL in that case as
this is a clear thermal zone configuration mistake.

If polling_delay is nonzero and passive_delay is 0, which is regarded
as a valid thermal zone configuration, the thermal zone will use polling
except when tz->passive is nonzero.  However, the expected behavior in
that case is to continue temperature polling with the same delay value
regardless of tz->passive, so set passive_delay to the polling_delay
value then.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---

This supersedes

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/4940808.31r3eYUQgx@rjwysocki.net/

---
 drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c |    8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

Index: linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
@@ -1391,6 +1391,14 @@ thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips(
 	if (num_trips > 0 && !trips)
 		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
 
+	if (polling_delay) {
+		if (passive_delay > polling_delay)
+			return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+		if (!passive_delay)
+			passive_delay = polling_delay;
+	}
+
 	if (!thermal_class)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
 

Re: [PATCH v3] thermal: core: Add sanity checks for polling_delay and passive_delay

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 11/07/2024 14:39, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> 
> If polling_delay is nonzero and passive_delay is greater than
> polling_delay, the thermal zone temperature will be updated less
> often when tz->passive is nonzero, which is not as expected.  Make
> the thermal zone registration fail with -EINVAL in that case as
> this is a clear thermal zone configuration mistake.
> 
> If polling_delay is nonzero and passive_delay is 0, which is regarded
> as a valid thermal zone configuration, the thermal zone will use polling
> except when tz->passive is nonzero.  However, the expected behavior in
> that case is to continue temperature polling with the same delay value
> regardless of tz->passive, so set passive_delay to the polling_delay
> value then.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

> 
> This supersedes
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/4940808.31r3eYUQgx@rjwysocki.net/
> 
> ---
>   drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c |    8 ++++++++
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> @@ -1391,6 +1391,14 @@ thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips(
>   	if (num_trips > 0 && !trips)
>   		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>   
> +	if (polling_delay) {
> +		if (passive_delay > polling_delay)
> +			return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> +		if (!passive_delay)
> +			passive_delay = polling_delay;
> +	}
> +
>   	if (!thermal_class)
>   		return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>   
> 
> 
> 

-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog