Hi Jean: (liberal snips) * Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> [2004-09-20 11:10:56 +0100]: > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 01:00:22 -0400, Mark M. Hoffman wrote > > Well, here are a couple more, from adm1031.c: > > > > auto_fan?_min_pwm => pwm?_auto_min > > > > auto_fan?_channel => pwm?_auto_channels > > > > The new names come from your most recent proposal [1], s/fan/pwm/ where > > necessary. > > > > [1] http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg08477.html > > I don't think this belong to the same changeset. The pwm and vid changes are > reverts from my own changes back in the early 2.6 times. They are documented > and were considered stable, and part of libsensors already, which is why we > have to provide compatibility. > > (...) > > So to me there are only the two changes you mentioned first, which should be > quite simple from libsensors' point of view. Fair enough. > > (One) In adm1031.c lines 594-595: > > > > (...) > > > > That's a bug, right? > > I don't think so. As Alexandre suggests in its reply, the ADM1030 and ADM1031 > have registers those meaning change depending of a selected mode. We could not > think of a better way than this implementation, which may look a bit confusing > first (changing one value will of course change the other as well from the > (...) Right, no problem. > > (Two) As for fscher.c, I can't honestly tell whether or not it actually > > supports PWM control. If it does, then the choice of variable and > > structure names was very poor. > > The FSC Hermes doesn't have PWM capabilities as far as I know. I wonder what > made you think it could have. Are you sure? Try 'grep pwm kernel/chips/fscher.c' in 2.4/CVS and same in 2.6.9. Actually, the 2.4/CVS and 2.6.9 drivers don't look similar at all. Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman at lightlink.com
