lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] Add support to disable sensor groups in P9
From
Date
On 05/16/2018 11:10 PM, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote:
>
>
> On 05/15/2018 08:32 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 04:24:32PM +0530, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote:
>>> This patch series adds support to enable/disable OCC based
>>> inband-sensor groups at runtime. The environmental sensor groups are
>>> managed in HWMON and the remaining platform specific sensor groups are
>>> managed in /sys/firmware/opal.
>>>
>>> The firmware changes required for this patch is posted below:
>>> https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/skiboot/2018-March/010812.html
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for not getting back earlier. This is a tough one.
>>
>
> Thanks for the reply. I have tried to answer your questions according to my
> understanding below:
>
>> Key problem is that you are changing the ABI with those new attributes.
>> On top of that, the attributes _do_ make some sense (many chips support
>> enabling/disabling of individual sensors), suggesting that those or
>> similar attributes may or even should at some point be added to the ABI.
>>
>> At the same time, returning "0" as measurement values when sensors are
>> disabled does not seem like a good idea, since "0" is a perfectly valid
>> measurement, at least for most sensors.
>
> I agree.
>
>>
>> Given that, we need to have a discussion about adding _enable attributes to
>> the ABI
>
>> what is the scope,
> IIUC the scope should be RW and the attribute is defined for each supported
> sensor group
>

That is _your_ need. I am not aware of any other chip where a per-sensor group
attribute would make sense. The discussion we need has to extend beyond the need
of a single chip.

Guenter

>> when should the attributes exist and when not,
> We control this currently via device-tree
>
>> do we want/need power_enable or powerX_enable or both, and so on), and
> We need power_enable right now
>
>> what to return if a sensor is disabled (such as -ENODATA).
> -ENODATA sounds good.
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Shilpa
>
> Once we have an
>> agreement, we can continue with an implementation.
>>
>> Guenter
>>
>>> Shilpasri G Bhat (3):
>>> powernv:opal-sensor-groups: Add support to enable sensor groups
>>> hwmon: ibmpowernv: Add attributes to enable/disable sensor groups
>>> powernv: opal-sensor-groups: Add attributes to disable/enable sensors
>>>
>>> .../ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-opal-sensor-groups | 34 ++++++
>>> Documentation/hwmon/ibmpowernv | 31 ++++-
>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal-api.h | 4 +-
>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal.h | 2 +
>>> .../powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-sensor-groups.c | 104 ++++++++++++-----
>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-wrappers.S | 1 +
>>> drivers/hwmon/ibmpowernv.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++++--
>>> 7 files changed, 265 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-firmware-opal-sensor-groups
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hwmon" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-17 14:39    [W:0.087 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site