On 4/17/07, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas at hp.com> wrote: > On Monday 16 April 2007 15:14, Luca Tettamanti wrote: > > Problem is that ACPI methods are not documented at all (how am I > > supposed to know that "G6T6" is the reading of the 12V rail?) while the > > datasheet of hw monitoring chips (w83627ehf in my case) are public (more > > or less). > > Yes, I see that it's attractive to use a single w83627ehf.c driver. > For an ACPI driver, we'd have to build a list of PNP IDs, and possibly > information about which methods read which information. That's > certainly more work. > > On the other hand, the ACPI driver would avoid the synchronization > issues that started this whole thread. That's a pretty compelling > advantage. > > > Furthermore, sensor driver exposes all the reading of the chip > > (e.g. in the DSDT I can't find the VSB or battery voltage). > > Maybe Asus didn't hook up those readings on the board. I would > guess that PC Probe doesn't expose the VSB or battery voltage either. PC Probe does not. But the lines are wired and the readings (from Linux) are sensible. > I'm sure you've seen these: > http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-October/014050.html > http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/AsusFormulaHacking Actually I haven't, I've happily ignored ACPI until now ;-) My DSDT doesn't look too bad, I may give it a try... Luca
