Hi Karsten, On 2005-09-09, Karsten Petersen wrote: > My main problem is easily describable as: Although there was a good > looking sensors.conf, its options were not used with all chips. Those > chips with chip-lines like "bla-*" were ok, but those with lines like > "bla-i2c-3-*" just showed default labels. Yes, this is a known problem with Linus 2.6. > One first problem was, that the "bus" line in sensors.conf needs to have > another value than when running kernel 2.4 on the same machine. > With kernel 2.4 its like this: > bus "i2c-4" "SMBus 8111 adapter (CPU3)" "Non-I2C SMBus adapter" > But with kernel 2.6, it must be like this: > bus "i2c-4" "SMBus 8111 adapter (CPU3)" "Unavailable from sysfs" > It seems to me, that the third argument is redundant these days, so it > could probably be dropped or made optional. It took me some time to > find out about this problem, because the comparison in lib/data.c:233 is > not helpful at all. :-/ Correct, that explains a part of the problem. Thanks for pointing it out. We should probably drop the algorithm test completely (and make it optional in the configuration file as you suggested, but I don't know how do to this myself.) That algorithm name was given way too much importance in the early days of lm_sensors, I believe it should never have been handled by libsensors in the first place. Algorithms are implementation details users don't care about. > But this did not solve my problem, more sensor chips showed usefull > labels but not all. After a lot of printf debugging it became clear, > that the sensors_substitute_chip function in lib/data.c assigns wrong > bus numbers to the configured chips. This is because the busses in the > sensors_config_busses array are _not_ sorted, so > sensors_config_busses[j] does not need to be the bus with id "j". But > the function thinks, that this is the case. It probably was with kernel > 2.4, but not with the kernel 2.6.9 (+lot of patches) I am running. > The attached patch corrects this behavior, it uses the bus id from the > entry sensors_config_busses[j] instead of "j". Thanks a lot for this patch. I had been investigating this bug some times ago but could never figure out what the problem was. It's really great that you did succeed in finding the reason. I know it'll make a few other users happy too. Thanks again, -- Jean Delvare
