> Attached patch for lm_sensors (...) OK, applied with some changes, fixes and improvements. I would appreciate it if you could check it out from CVS and test. BTW, quoting myself: > > + for (i=0; i<32; ++i) > > You can skip i=0, it cannot fail. Of course not. It cannot fail *if* the registers are read only, but we don't know if they are (hey, this is why we are testing). That said, reverting the for loop order would leave more time for the values to change if they have to (but I didn't do that it the patch however). Thanks for your contribution to our project. -- Jean Delvare http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
