I don't know anything about anything. But sounds good to me. Looks solid, I think. Add support in Fintek f71882fg too. On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> 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 > > I have made a first proposal 3 weeks ago, and got a number of > interesting comments about it. Here comes a second version hopefully > addressing all the concerns that had been raised. Changes include: > * Handle multiple intrusion detection switches. > * Let the user control whether chassis intrusion should result in > ?system beeping or not. At least the Winbond W83793G supports this, and > ?probably other chips as well. > > > sysfs interface > =============== > > intrusion[0-*]_alarm > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Chassis intrusion detection > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0: OK > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?1: intrusion detected > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?RW > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Contrary to regular alarm flags which clear themselves > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?automatically when read, this one sticks until cleared by > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?the user. This is done by writing 0 to the file. Writing > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?other values is unsupported. > > intrusion[0-*]_beep > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Chassis intrusion beep > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0: disable > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?1: enable > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?RW > > drivers > ======= > > Drivers adm9240, w83792d and w83793 implement this feature in > non-standard ways. They should be converted to the new, standard > interface. > > libsensors > ========== > > SENSORS_FEATURE_INTRUSION = 0x19 > SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_INTRUSION_ALARM = (SENSORS_FEATURE_INTRUSION << 8) | 0x80 > SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_INTRUSION_BEEP = SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_INTRUSION_ALARM + 1 > > sensors > ======= > > Reading the value of the chassis intrusion alarm and beep subfeatures > is done like for any other subfeature. Likewise for writing to the beep > subfeature. > > Writing to the alarm subfeature, 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 intrusion detection flag (e.g. "sensors > --clear-intrusion"). > > > If anyone has objections or comments, please speak up. > > -- > Jean Delvare >
