Juerg Haefliger wrote: > Hi Jean, > > On 4/22/07, Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> wrote: >> Hi Juerg, >> >> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:04:28 -0700, Juerg Haefliger wrote: >>> George, Jean, >>> >>> I'm struggling with the same issue for the DME1737 I'm currently >>> working on. This chip also features temp zones and "hottest of x,y,z" >>> PWM control. The current sysfs standard is not flexible enough to >>> handle these features, especially the combination of a single PWM >>> being controlled by multiple temp inputs and multiple PMWs being >>> controlled by the same temp input. I believe we need another layer of >>> mapping. I.e. temp->pwm is not sufficient, but rather temp->zone->pwm. >>> >>> I therefore propose the add the following sysfs attributes to our standard: >>> >>> zone[1-*]_auto_channels_temp for temp-to-zone mapping >>> pwm[1-*]_auto_channels_zone for zone-to-pwm mapping >>> zone[1-*]_auto_point[1-*]_temp for zone temp auto points. >> I don't see what value it adds compared to what we currently have. >> >> We have pwm[1-*]_auto_channels_temp, which is a bit vector. We have one >> file per PWM, one bit per temperature channel, so all in all we have a >> Npwm x Ntemp matrix, or N-N relation between PWM and temperatures. This >> already allows us to handle cases such as "the hottest of tempA and >> tempB control pwmC" or "tempD controls pwmE and pwmF". > > Yes, I understand that. > > >> You propose to add the concept of zone. According to the above, each >> zone could include any temperature channel, so we have a N-N relation >> between zones and temperatures. Then you express another N-N relation >> between PWM channels and zones. As far as I can see, this results in a >> N-N relation between temperatures and PWM, just expressed differently. >> Am I missing something? What do you think it would let us express, >> which the current model doesn't? > > What I can't seem to map to our current standard (or maybe I just > don't see it) is the concept of multiple sets of thermal thresholds > for a single temp input. Example: pwm2 is controlled by zone2 and pwm3 > is controlled by zone3 but both zone2 and zone3 are controlled by > temp3. Both zone2 & 3 have different thermal thresholds. > > With the current standard I can only apply one set of thresholds to > temp3 via temp3_auto_point[1-*]_temp. > Thats easy, AFAIK you can have either temp[1-*]_auto_point[1-*]_temp, or pwm[1-*]_auto_point[1-*]_temp, iow you can couple the autopoints to either a temp channel or a pwm channel depending on if the thresholds are set per temp channel or per pwm channel. I'm not 100% sure though, so lets wait what others have to say too. Regards, Hans
