Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 24 Oct 2014 10:06:43 +0800 | From | Caesar Wang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v13 4/5] ARM: dts: add main Thermal info to rk3288 |
| |
在 2014/10/24 9:37, Dmitry Torokhov 写道: > On October 23, 2014 6:08:52 PM PDT, Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >> Dmitry, >> >> 在 2014/10/24 8:46, Dmitry Torokhov 写道: >>> Hi Caesar, >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 05:40:06PM +0800, Caesar Wang wrote: >>>> This patch is depend on rk3288-thermal.dtsi,or >>>> it will compile error. >>>> >>>> If the temperature over a period of time High,over 120C >>>> the resulting TSHUT gave CRU module,let it reset >>>> the entire chip,or via GPIO give PMIC. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@rock-chips.com> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi >>>> index cb18bb4..85fc17a 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi >>>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ >>>> #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h> >>>> #include <dt-bindings/pinctrl/rockchip.h> >>>> #include <dt-bindings/clock/rk3288-cru.h> >>>> +#include <dt-bindings/thermal/thermal.h> >>>> #include "skeleton.dtsi" >>>> >>>> / { >>>> @@ -66,6 +67,7 @@ >>>> 216000 900000 >>>> 126000 900000 >>>> >; >>>> + #cooling-cells = <2>; /* min followed by max */ >>>> clock-latency = <40000>; >>>> clocks = <&cru ARMCLK>; >>>> }; >>>> @@ -346,6 +348,19 @@ >>>> status = "disabled"; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> + tsadc: tsadc@ff280000 { >>>> + compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-tsadc"; >>>> + reg = <0xff280000 0x100>; >>>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 37 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; >>>> + clocks = <&cru SCLK_TSADC>, <&cru PCLK_TSADC>; >>>> + clock-names = "tsadc", "apb_pclk"; >>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&otp_out>; >>>> + #thermal-sensor-cells = <1>; >>>> + hw-shut-temp = <120000>; >>> I do not think this is a good value. You have (in the other DTS file) >>> passive trip point at 80 and critical (which should result in orderly >>> shutdown) at 125. But here you define hardware-controlled shutdown at >>> 120C, which is backwards. You should have: >>> >>> passive <= critical <= hardware >> Hmmm.... >> but, the system will shutdown when temperature over critial value, >> there is no chance of triggering the TSHUT. >> >> If the temperature over a period of time High,as we know, >> the resulting TSHUT gave CRU module,let it hot-reset the entire chip, >> or via GPIO give PMIC cold-reset the entire chip. > Having tshut trigger is not the goal, tshut is the measure of last resort. If we can handle thermal conditions without triggering tshut, we achieved our goal. > > Tshut triggering is " oh, crap, nothing we tried works" scenario.
I don't think so.
In general,We should have: passive <= hardware(reset entire chip) <= critical(shutdown)
The temperature be rising qulckly if have some other conditions, the "critical" will play a role.
Agreed?
> > Thanks. >
-- Best regards, Caesar
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |