Hi Juerg, Keith, > On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 19:33 -0700, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > > Hmm... Don't count on it. I'm not sure how safe it is to unhide things... Depends on how old the hardware is, and what the BIOS is doing. Keith's system seems to be relatively old so it may be safe. On more recent systems it's more risky. The first thing to check is the ACPI DSDT table. If it somehow accesses the SMBus I/O ports (0xfc00-0xfc1f) then unhiding the SMBus is a bad idea. Keith, can you please send your DSDT table to Juerg and myself in private? You can also try loading the ACPI "fan" and "thermal" drivers, and see if anything interesting shows up in /proc/acpi/fan and /proc/acpi/thermal_zone, respectively. If nothing shows up, chances are good that ACPI isn't making use of the ADM1023 chips. Lastly, you should also pay attention to the ADM1023 limits. If you see them change magically, this means that the BIOS is using the ADM1023 chips somehow. If this happens, then it's not safe to unhide the SMBus. I can't help but notice that the CPU temperature limit is set to 61 degrees C which is _not_ the chip default according to the datasheet - so this suggests that the BIOS has set this limit at boot time. Although this doesn't imply that it's touching the chip after that. If you go through all these tests and nothing suspect shows up, then we can patch the kernel to unhide the SMBus automatically on your system... Although it might not be easy because not many PCI devices have a sub-ID on your system. On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:42:57 -0600, Keith Romberg wrote: > So far things are stable under continuous changing load over 12 hours > now. I am sure the reason why Compaq hide the sensors/chips/buses is > that they want the 'customer' to use their crappy system management > software. That's possible, yeah. -- Jean Delvare
