No disagreements. Updated patch enclosed. -- charles On 8/18/06, Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > > From: Charles Spirakis <bezaur at gmail.com> > > > > The alarm bits and the beep enable bits are in different positions in the > > hardware. This patch documents the problem and leaves it to the user-space code > > to handle the situation. When this driver is updated to the standardized sysfs > > alarm/beep methodology, this won't be a problem. > > > > This is a documentation only change. > > Mostly fine with me, see my comments inline. > > > +alarm_rsvd : alarms: 0x800000 beep_enable: -------- > > +reserved : alarms: 0x008000 beep_enable: 0x008000 > > I don't think it's worth documenting these, as they won't ever be used > by definition. > > > + > > +*** NOTE: It is the responsibility of user-space code to handle the fact > > +that the enable and alarm bits are in different positions when using that > > +feature of the chip. > > Please write "beep enable" rather than only "enable", it's clearer. > > > > > When an alarm goes off, you can be warned by a beeping signal through your > > computer speaker. It is possible to enable all beeping globally, or only > > @@ -109,5 +117,7 @@ often will do no harm, but will return ' > > > > W83791D TODO: > > --------------- > > -Provide a patch for per-file alarms as discussed on the mailing list > > +Provide a patch for per-file alarms and beep enables as defined in the hwmon > > + documentation (.../Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface) > > No need to add ".../" before documentation. > > > Provide a patch for smart-fan control (still need appropriate motherboard/fans) > > + > > No need to add this blank line. > > > diff -urpN linux-2.6.18-rc2-git2/drivers/hwmon/w83791d.c linux-2.6.18-rc2-git2_update/drivers/hwmon/w83791d.c > > --- linux-2.6.18-rc2-git2/drivers/hwmon/w83791d.c 2006-07-24 19:00:43.000000000 -0700 > > +++ linux-2.6.18-rc2-git2_update/drivers/hwmon/w83791d.c 2006-08-17 11:30:12.000000000 -0700 > > @@ -28,8 +28,9 @@ > > The w83791d chip appears to be part way between the 83781d and the > > 83792d. Thus, this file is derived from both the w83792d.c and > > w83781d.c files, but its output is more along the lines of the > > - 83781d (which means there are no changes to the user-mode sensors > > - program which treats the 83791d as an 83781d). > > + 83781d. > > + > > + The w83791g chip is the same as the w83791d but lead-free. > > */ > > While you're at it, what about removing the "its output is more along > the lines of the 83781d" part? I don't see how relevant it is, the > output is standardized anyway. > > Thanks, > -- > Jean Delvare > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: w83791d_update.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 5710 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060818/7b7dcbee/attachment.bin
