On 4/17/07, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Monday 16 April 2007 15:14, Luca Tettamanti wrote: > Problem is that ACPI methods are not documented at all (how am I > supposed to know that "G6T6" is the reading of the 12V rail?) while the > datasheet of hw monitoring chips (w83627ehf in my case) are public (more > or less). Yes, I see that it's attractive to use a single w83627ehf.c driver. For an ACPI driver, we'd have to build a list of PNP IDs, and possibly information about which methods read which information. That's certainly more work. On the other hand, the ACPI driver would avoid the synchronization issues that started this whole thread. That's a pretty compelling advantage. > Furthermore, sensor driver exposes all the reading of the chip > (e.g. in the DSDT I can't find the VSB or battery voltage). Maybe Asus didn't hook up those readings on the board. I would guess that PC Probe doesn't expose the VSB or battery voltage either.
PC Probe does not. But the lines are wired and the readings (from Linux) are sensible.
I'm sure you've seen these: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-October/014050.html http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/AsusFormulaHacking
Actually I haven't, I've happily ignored ACPI until now ;-) My DSDT doesn't look too bad, I may give it a try... Luca - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
