Skip to contentSkip to conversation

arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Enable passive polling for cpu thermal zones

PATCH In review Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi 2 participants 2 messages Dec 15, 2020

Subsystems (4)
Device tree bindings Arm Qualcomm mailing list Arm Qualcomm support Arm/Qualcomm chromebook support
lore
Share & tools
lore

Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Enable passive polling for cpu thermal zones

Enable passive polling delay for cpu thermal zone for sc7180. It enables periodic thermal zone re-evaluation on post first trip temperature violation.

Signed-off-by Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi <[email protected]>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 20 ++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi +10 -10
index 98050b3..79d0747 100644
@@ -4355,7 +4355,7 @@
 
 	thermal-zones {
 		cpu0-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 1>;

@@ -4403,7 +4403,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu1-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 2>;

@@ -4451,7 +4451,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu2-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 3>;

@@ -4499,7 +4499,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu3-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 4>;

@@ -4547,7 +4547,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu4-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 5>;

@@ -4595,7 +4595,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu5-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 6>;

@@ -4643,7 +4643,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu6-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 9>;

@@ -4683,7 +4683,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu7-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 10>;

@@ -4723,7 +4723,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu8-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 11>;

@@ -4763,7 +4763,7 @@
 		};
 
 		cpu9-thermal {
-			polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+			polling-delay-passive = <50>;
 			polling-delay = <0>;
 
 			thermal-sensors = <&tsens0 12>;
Signature · 2 lines
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
#1 lore raw

Hi,

Quoted 15 lines · Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi

Enable passive polling delay for cpu thermal zone for sc7180. It enables periodic thermal zone re-evaluation on post first trip temperature violation.

Signed-off-by Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi <[email protected]>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 20 ++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi +0 -0
index 98050b3..79d0747 100644

arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi line 4358

Quoted 5 lines
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi +1 -1
@@ -4355,7 +4355,7 @@
 
        thermal-zones {
                cpu0-thermal {
-                       polling-delay-passive = <0>;
+                       polling-delay-passive = <50>;

Matthias already landed a similar patch, see:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201111120334.1.Ifc04ea235c3c370e3b21ec3b4d5dead83cc403b4@changeid

I guess the question is whether 50 is better or 250 is better. Is this just a finger in the wind estimate or do you have data showing that 50 is better than 250?

-Doug