Hi Jean,
Thank you very much for your reply!
2009/10/8 Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Lu,
> Can you please elaborate about it? Don't you ever plan to get your
> driver included in the kernel tree?
I am glad to know you think it maybe worth to merge to the kernel
tree. :-) Thank you again!
Sure, if it can even be merged, I will try to improve it to meet the
need. Tobias and I had work on this
aim too.
> If your driver won't ever be merged, I admit I am not interested in
> reviewing it. If the plan is to merge it, then I will review it.
>
> I can't test your code, I do not have any supporter piece of hardware,
> sorry.
>
> I've looked at the intel-agp driver, which binds to the same PCI
> devices. It's way too big and complex to resort to the same hack we
> have in sis5595 and i2c-sis5595 for example. The intel-agp driver must
> remain a "real" pci driver which binds to its devices, in particular so
> that power management works OK.
>
> This leaves us with 3 alternatives.
>
> 1* Add hwmon support to the intel-agp driver directly. As this driver
> is already somewhat big (77 kB) it would probably go unnoticed. The
> hwmon part in your driver is probably about 350 lines of code.
>
> 2* Implement hwmon as a separate module, simply use pci_get_dev()
> during initialization of that module, and if a device is found,
> register a platform driver and instantiate a platform device for the
> hwmon part. This is essentially what your implementation does,
> except that your module registers the platform driver and device
> regardless of the presence of a supported chip, which is bad.
>
> 3* Let intel-agp instantiate the platform device for hwmon, and only
> register the driver in the separate module. This avoid some code
> duplication, and we can have the hwmon module auto-load. Maybe the
> best compromise code-wise, but possibly somewhat more difficult to
> maintain.
>
> Note that driver auto-loading should also work with option #2, although
> your implementation doesn't do it. It shouldn't be too hard to add.
Excuse me, I don''t quite catch about "driver auto-loading". Do you
meet gm965temp build-in,
while not as a module?
Can you give me more hint? And I will try to improve gm965temp. Thanks a lot!
> I don't have a strong opinion between these 3 choices, but I want the
> driver to auto-load as needed.
>
> --
> Jean Delvare
>
The updated sensor-detect patch based on svn code is as following:
---
From: Lu Zhihe <tombowfly@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH] sensors-detect add gm965temp detected for lm-sensors
Signed-off-by: Lu Zhihe <tombowfly@xxxxxxxxx>
---
--- prog/detect/sensors-detect.orig 2009-10-09 21:43:12.000000000 +0000
+++ prog/detect/sensors-detect 2009-10-09 21:50:13.000000000 +0000
@@ -147,6 +147,16 @@ $revision =~ s/ \([^()]*\)//;
procid => "Intel SCH",
driver => "i2c-isch",
}, {
+ vendid => 0x8086,
+ devid => 0x2a00,
+ procid => "Intel GM965",
+ driver => "gm965temp",
+ }, {
+ vendid => 0x8086,
+ devid => 0x2a10,
+ procid => "Intel GME965",
+ driver => "gm965temp",
+ }, {
vendid => 0x1106,
devid => 0x3040,
procid => "VIA Technologies VT82C586B Apollo ACPI",
@@ -1860,6 +1870,10 @@ use vars qw(@cpu_ids);
driver => "i5k_amb",
detect => \&intel_amb_detect,
}, {
+ name => "Intel GM/GME965 thermal sensor",
+ driver => "gm965temp",
+ detect => \&intel_gm965_detect,
+ }, {
name => "VIA C7 thermal and voltage sensors",
driver => "c7temp",
detect => \&c7temp_detect,
@@ -5301,6 +5315,15 @@ sub intel_amb_detect
return;
}
+sub intel_gm965_detect
+{
+ if ((exists $pci_list{'8086:2a00'}) || # Intel GM965
+ (exists $pci_list{'8086:2a10'})) { # Intel GME965
+ return 9;
+ }
+ return;
+}
+
sub coretemp_detect
{
my $probecpu;
---
Thx
Lu Zhihe
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
