headers
Chen Gong | 2 Nov 2010 02:21
Picon

fix a minor error for sensors-detect

Hi, Guenter

I can't access CVS easily from here and I don't know where to submit a 
lm-sensor tool patch, so I put it here.

I occasionally found on my board there is a sensor named asc7621 and
it had been supported since 2.6.34 (I get this info from lm-sensor wiki 
devices list), but sensors-detect doesn't update its status. Until now
it still shows "to-be-written". So I update it from "to-be-written" to 
"asc7621". Now it works fine.

So would you please help to merge it into lm-sensor tool ?

Thanks in advance !

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Guenter Roeck | 2 Nov 2010 02:40
Picon
Favicon

Re: fix a minor error for sensors-detect

Hi Chen,

On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 09:21:24PM -0400, Chen Gong wrote:
> Hi, Guenter
> 
> I can't access CVS easily from here and I don't know where to submit a 
> lm-sensor tool patch, so I put it here.
> 
> I occasionally found on my board there is a sensor named asc7621 and
> it had been supported since 2.6.34 (I get this info from lm-sensor wiki 
> devices list), but sensors-detect doesn't update its status. Until now
> it still shows "to-be-written". So I update it from "to-be-written" to 
> "asc7621". Now it works fine.
> 
Jean fixed the problem on June 19. The latest released version of lm-sensors 
(3.2.0) should include the fix.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jean Delvare | 2 Nov 2010 13:26
Gravatar

[PATCH] Display 3 decimal places in raw sensors output

I would like the raw output of "sensors" to display 3 decimal places
as most sensor types use at the sysfs interface. This will make it
easier for us to help users find out correct scaling factors when
needed. Instead of telling them to go read the raw sysfs attributes,
they can just report the output of "sensors -u -c /dev/null".

Objection anyone?
---
 prog/sensors/chips.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- lm-sensors.orig/prog/sensors/chips.c	2010-07-01 14:33:21.000000000 +0200
+++ lm-sensors/prog/sensors/chips.c	2010-11-02 13:24:12.000000000 +0100
 <at>  <at>  -58,7 +58,7  <at>  <at>  void print_chip_raw(const sensors_chip_n
 						sub->name,
 						sensors_strerror(err));
 				else
-					printf("  %s: %.2f\n", sub->name, val);
+					printf("  %s: %.3f\n", sub->name, val);
 			} else
 				printf("(%s)\n", label);
 		}

--

-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Jean Delvare | 2 Nov 2010 14:21
Gravatar

Re: [RFC v2] Support of chassis intrusion detection

Hi Fred,

Please don't top-post.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:15:03 +0200, Fred . wrote:
> I am sorry tha I do not have the nescesary equipment nor skill set in
> order to be able to help test
> or contribute with code.
> 
> Now since the interface definition is upstreams, I hope that someone
> may implement the feature
> in at least one of the drivers.

This is done now: the new w83795 hardware monitoring driver implements
the standard intrusion detection interface.

I have written user-space code to use that interface. I have two
patches, one for libsensors, one for sensors, both apply on top of
lm-sensors SVN, if anyone wants to give them a try. I've attached them.
They work OK for me, I'll commit them soon unless someone finds and
reports a problem with them.

Then we will have to convert the remaining drivers. I found 3 drivers
which need to be converted: adm9240, w83792d and w83793. If there are
more, please let me know.

--

-- 
Jean Delvare
Attachment (libsensors-add-intrusion-detection-support.patch): text/x-patch, 4374 bytes
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Guenter Roeck | 2 Nov 2010 15:04
Picon
Favicon

Re: [RFC v2] Support of chassis intrusion detection

On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 09:21:02AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Fred,
> 
> Please don't top-post.
> 
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:15:03 +0200, Fred . wrote:
> > I am sorry tha I do not have the nescesary equipment nor skill set in
> > order to be able to help test
> > or contribute with code.
> > 
> > Now since the interface definition is upstreams, I hope that someone
> > may implement the feature
> > in at least one of the drivers.
> 
> This is done now: the new w83795 hardware monitoring driver implements
> the standard intrusion detection interface.
> 
> I have written user-space code to use that interface. I have two
> patches, one for libsensors, one for sensors, both apply on top of
> lm-sensors SVN, if anyone wants to give them a try. I've attached them.
> They work OK for me, I'll commit them soon unless someone finds and
> reports a problem with them.
> 
> Then we will have to convert the remaining drivers. I found 3 drivers
> which need to be converted: adm9240, w83792d and w83793. If there are
> more, please let me know.
> 
Reminds me. I have a set of patches for those almost ready for submission.
Hope you didn't do the same work ;).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Guenter Roeck | 2 Nov 2010 15:05
Picon
Favicon

Re: [PATCH] Display 3 decimal places in raw sensors output

On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 08:26:44AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> I would like the raw output of "sensors" to display 3 decimal places
> as most sensor types use at the sysfs interface. This will make it
> easier for us to help users find out correct scaling factors when
> needed. Instead of telling them to go read the raw sysfs attributes,
> they can just report the output of "sensors -u -c /dev/null".
> 
> Objection anyone?

No objection. Makes sense to me.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jean Delvare | 2 Nov 2010 15:29
Gravatar

Re: [RFC v2] Support of chassis intrusion detection

On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 07:04:56 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 09:21:02AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > Hi Fred,
> > 
> > Please don't top-post.
> > 
> > On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:15:03 +0200, Fred . wrote:
> > > I am sorry tha I do not have the nescesary equipment nor skill set in
> > > order to be able to help test
> > > or contribute with code.
> > > 
> > > Now since the interface definition is upstreams, I hope that someone
> > > may implement the feature
> > > in at least one of the drivers.
> > 
> > This is done now: the new w83795 hardware monitoring driver implements
> > the standard intrusion detection interface.
> > 
> > I have written user-space code to use that interface. I have two
> > patches, one for libsensors, one for sensors, both apply on top of
> > lm-sensors SVN, if anyone wants to give them a try. I've attached them.
> > They work OK for me, I'll commit them soon unless someone finds and
> > reports a problem with them.
> > 
> > Then we will have to convert the remaining drivers. I found 3 drivers
> > which need to be converted: adm9240, w83792d and w83793. If there are
> > more, please let me know.
> > 
> Reminds me. I have a set of patches for those almost ready for submission.
> Hope you didn't do the same work ;).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Guenter Roeck | 2 Nov 2010 16:18
Picon
Favicon

Re: [RFC v2] Support of chassis intrusion detection

On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 10:29:23AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
[ ... ]
> > Reminds me. I have a set of patches for those almost ready for submission.
> > Hope you didn't do the same work ;).
> 
> I just did :( I should have read my mail earlier. Well at least we'll
> see if we agree on what needs to be done and how to do it.
> 
My fault. Nothing you could have done about it. I wrote the patches
after the original e-mail exchange and then forgot about it.
Sorry for wasting your time.

Big question remains - want to go with your or my patches ? I'd suggest yours
unless they are not ready, since you know the code and chips better than I do.
Otherwise I can send out mine for review later today.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Andrey Repin | 2 Nov 2010 16:34
Picon
Favicon

Re: Compiling 3.2.0

Greetings, Andrey Repin!

> I've a kind of an issue. It was true for 3.1.2 and now for 3.2.0.
> Programs building fine with exception of /prog/init/sensord.init - after
> compilation, it retain all the  <at> tokens <at>  typical for pre-configure scripts. But
> as far as I can tell, the compilation does not involve configure process.
> So, how to get past this?

Any answers?
Or does the absence of reaction implies that sensord is deprecated?

--
WBR,
 Andrey Repin (hell-for-yahoo <at> umail.ru) 02.11.2010, <18:33>

Sorry for my terrible english...

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors <at> lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jean Delvare | 2 Nov 2010 17:24
Gravatar

Re: [RFC v2] Support of chassis intrusion detection

Hi Guenter,

On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:18:16 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 10:29:23AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> [ ... ]
> > > Reminds me. I have a set of patches for those almost ready for submission.
> > > Hope you didn't do the same work ;).
> > 
> > I just did :( I should have read my mail earlier. Well at least we'll
> > see if we agree on what needs to be done and how to do it.
> > 
> My fault. Nothing you could have done about it. I wrote the patches
> after the original e-mail exchange and then forgot about it.
> Sorry for wasting your time.
> 
> Big question remains - want to go with your or my patches ? I'd suggest yours
> unless they are not ready, since you know the code and chips better than I do.
> Otherwise I can send out mine for review later today.

OK, let's go with mine. I'll post them later today, please review them
if you have time.

Note that I am not specially familiar with the w83792d and w83793
drivers. And I don't have a test device for any of the 3 drivers
(register dumps don't work for that kind of thing.) It might be
difficult to find testers, as not all boards with these chips have the
case open pin wired, and not all cases have an intrusion detection
switch.

--

--
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane