Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi all, > > A number of users have asked us to support the chassis intrusion > detection feature which some hardware monitoring chip have. I've > created a ticket for this: > http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370 > Here is a proposal. > > sysfs interface > =============== > > chassis_intrusion > Chassis intrusion detection > 0: OK > 1: intrusion detected > RW > Writing 0 clears the detection flag. > Writing other values is unsupported. > > It's not totally clear whether clearing should be done by writing 0 or > 1. 0 is more respectful of traditional sysfs semantics that you should > be able to read back what you just wrote, so it has my vote. > > drivers > ======= > > Drivers adm9240, w83792d and w83793 implement this feature in > non-standard ways. They should be converted to the new, standard > interface. > > libsensors > ========== > > Either > > SENSORS_FEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = 0x19 > SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = SENSORS_FEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION << 8 > > or rename SENSORS_FEATURE_BEEP_ENABLE to SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC and > > SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_BEEP_ENABLE = SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC << 8 > SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = (SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC << 8) + 1 > > sensors > ======= > > Reading the value of the chassis intrusion detection subfeature is done > like for any other subfeature. > > Writing, OTOH, can't be handled the same as writing limits, because we > certainly don't want to clear the flag automatically at lm_sensors > start or restart time. So we could add a dedicated flag to clear the > chassis intrusion detection flag (e.g. "sensors --clear-chassis"). > > If anyone has objections or comments, please speak up. > looks good to me, but I wonder if we should not prepare for the case where an IC has more then one chasis intrusion detection pin. Regards, Hans
