Hi Ira, On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:30:25 -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:54:36PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > There is a small problem with your patch. Yes I think I made a mistake > > originally, probably just copied the cache lifetime from another driver > > and did not realize it didn't match the refresh rate. However, it is > > also important for at least some I2C/SMBus devices to not be > > interrupted (by serial bus access) when they sample the data, otherwise > > the sampling is lost. For this reason, we try to make the cache > > lifetime always slightly longer than the polling period. > > > > So, having a cache lifetime of HZ / 2 is too tight IMHO. I would be > > happy with HZ / 2 + HZ / 10. Would that work for you? > > > > That should be fine. I never knew that some sensors have a problem with > being read while sampling. > > For what it is worth, I haven't seen a problem polling the adm1032 > sensor at 500ms intervals. In my application, I take readings from all > chips on my board every 500ms. I know that the ADM1032 chip isn't affected, I have one. But the driver supports many other chips, which I do not have, so we can't assume they all behave exactly the same. > Would you like me to submit a new patch, or do you just want to edit the > patch before you apply it? I'm happy with either one. I've modified the patch myself, consider it applied. And sorry for the delay... -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
