Hi Hans, > These newer uGuru's while similar are so much different that I think > they need / warrant a new driver. Putting support for them into the > current driver would be a big kludge. Yes new driver definitely better. > With this in mind the question becomes: how do we call this newer > driver? I'm tending towards the very original "abituguru2" as name. An > other option would be abit_ac2005 as AC2005 is how Abit seems to call > them internally (that is what the dll is named in the new windows > software and the name is used in Abit ini files). However it turns out > that the older uGuru's are probably called AC2003 by Abit intern, so > then the name of the older driver would be wrong. Also I don't think > that calling the drivers AC200X is going to help the end user find the > correct driver for its motherboard. Maybe abituguru2005 ? Well it does not matter only the name should be reasonably long. > > This new uGuru stuff has also lead me to 2 more questions: > 1) With the new uGuru I'm able to read a motherboard type from the uGuru > and with this type I can determine the exact sensor configuration (of > known motherboards) including the labels for the sensors. Now I really > want to keep all this knowledge in one place. So I'm thinking about > giving all the sensors a _label sysfs attribute and write a little > userspace program which can generate a (part of) sensors.conf based on > these _label sysfs files. Does this sound ok? This label stuff is good idea, because with PECI/SST and AMDSI technology the labels of temps and voltages will be known We just need to discuss the content of this file. > 2) The current abituguru will load (as in modprobe) with the newer I think Jean should know it. I'm too tired now to investigate, I dont know how to do that on first sight. Regards Rudolf
