> -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Guo <shawn...@kernel.org> > Sent: 2019年3月20日 22:49 > To: Andy Tang <andy.t...@nxp.com> > Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezc...@linaro.org>; mark.rutl...@arm.com; > devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linux...@vger.kernel.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Leo Li <leoyang...@nxp.com>; > edubez...@gmail.com; robh...@kernel.org; rui.zh...@intel.com; > linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: ls1088a: add one more thermal zone node > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:44:18AM +0000, Andy Tang wrote: > > > > Sensor ID placement > > > > 1 DDR controller 1 > > > > 2 DDR controller 2 > > > > 3 DDR controller 3 > > > > 4 core cluster 1 > > > > 5 core cluster 2 > > > > 6 core cluster 3 > > > > 7 core cluster 4 > > > > > > > > Apparently using CPU or CPU-cluster is not appropriate. Core-cluster is > better. > > > > > > So using CPU is appropriate for me, less confusing, more consistent > > > with other platforms. > > What about core cluster? We can't name it cpu0, cpu1 etc I think. > > Hmm, yes, that would be even more confusing. What about cpu-thermal-1, > cpu-thermal-2 ...? Cpu-thermal-x can't change anything better than cpuX. It can't reflect the concept of CLUSTER. I prefer to use core-cluster. It is a wild accepted term in ARM ecosystem.
BR, Andy > > Shawn
