Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] thermal: stm32: fix IRQ flood on low threshold | From | Daniel Lezcano <> | Date | Tue, 29 Oct 2019 18:34:00 +0100 |
| |
On 29/10/2019 18:24, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 18:21 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 29/10/2019 18:15, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 18:11 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>> On 29/10/2019 17:45, Pascal Paillet wrote: >>>>> Fix IRQ flood on low threshold by too ways: >>>> >>>> Can you state the issue first ? >>>> >>>>> - improve temperature reading resolution, >>>>> - add an hysteresis to the low threshold: on low threshold interrupt, >>>>> it is not possible to get the temperature value that has fired the >>>>> interrupt. The time to acquire a new value is enough for the CPU to >>>>> become hotter than the current low threshold. >>> [] >>>>> Signed-off-by: Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@st.com> >>>>> Change-Id: I3b63b8aab38fd651a165c4e69a2d090b3c6f5db3 >>>> >>>> Please remove the Change-Id tag. >>>> >>>> Joe, Andy? checkpatch does not see the Change-Id, is it the expected >>>> behavior? >>> >>> Yes. It's after a sign-off so checkpatch doesn't care. >> >> Ah, I guess it is for Gerrit but we don't want those Change-Id in the >> kernel history, right? > > So remove it from the patch.
It was not a sarcastic question. I just wanted to be sure the Change-Id is something we always want to remove. There are some of them in the kernel log and I got a doubt.
checkpatch is perfectly fine for me.
-- Daniel
-- <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
| |