Hi Ivo, On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:40:52 +0200, Ivo Manca wrote: > As we saw with my struggle for supporting the PCChips motherboard with > the sis5595 chip, we had a problem with a voltage channel which was > connected to a temperature sensors. However, there was no way to let > sensors know that the in4 was actually temperature instead of voltage. > I've added the related mail below (14/06/2007). Is this something for > libsensors4? Good point. I seem to remember that we had excluded the possibility to handle this at the driver level, as virtually every chip can be wired that way and we didn't want to modify all the drivers. And I can't think of an easy way to centralize it in a single kernel module either. To handle it in libsensors, the only missing part as far as I can see is a way to change the channel type, so that "sensors" displays the right things using the right units. We already have the value conversion support in place (using compute statements) so this part is OK. Channel types could be changed with a new statement in sensors.conf, say "type in4 temp" or something similar. Then feature types would be changed on the fly, just like we drop features with "ignore" statements. Changing channel types would probably be easier if we were using the same numbers for all channel type subfeatures, which isn't currently the case. I seem to remember that we were discussing this with Hans a few weeks ago. Back then I had no strong argument to change it, but this may be a good one. I'll look into this later. One thing that might cause problem is that the limits may need to be swapped depending on the thermistor type. I see no easy way to detect this though [1]. This is somewhat similar to some of the negative voltages, and although people sometimes ask about this, we seem to be able to live with it (with a FAQ entry maybe.) It would be great if you could create a trac ticket to track this feature request, so that it doesn't get overlooked. Thanks. [1] Well I do see a way, we could analyze the compute statement to find out in which direction the result changes depending on the raw value variations. Still I'm not sure if it's worth the effort. -- Jean Delvare
