Hi Yani, On Tue, 17 May 2005 07:18:51 -0400, Yani Ioannou <yani.ioannou at gmail.com> wrote: Following is derived from gcc -E adm1026.c with your patch (the script strips all but base number from numbered names): adm1026.c SENSOR_fan1_div RW adm1026.c SENSOR_fan1_input R adm1026.c SENSOR_fan1_min RW adm1026.c SENSOR_in0_input R adm1026.c SENSOR_in0_max RW adm1026.c SENSOR_in0_min RW adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_auto_point1_temp RW adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_auto_point1_temp_hyst R adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_crit RW adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_input R adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_max RW adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_min RW adm1026.c SENSOR_temp1_offset RW adm1026.c alarm_mask RW adm1026.c alarms R adm1026.c analog_out RW adm1026.c gpio RW adm1026.c gpio_mask RW adm1026.c pwm1 RW << these also should also adm1026.c pwm1_enable RW << have SENSOR_ in front adm1026.c temp1_auto_point1_pwm RW << of them, seems you adm1026.c temp1_crit_enable RW << missed a group? adm1026.c vid R adm1026.c vrm RW I'm assuming some magic elsewhere sees that 'SENSOR_' and removes it before it gets to sysfs. I can test adm9240, w83627hf and it87 drivers as well as watch the overall patterns as above. --Grant. _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors at lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
