Hi Guenter, On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 21:10:18 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) As usual, I don't have the time to review the code, but I'd like to at least comment on the sysfs interface changes: > > diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface b/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > index d4e2917..2dcec0f 100644 > --- a/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > @@ -421,11 +421,12 @@ power[1-*]_accuracy Accuracy of the power meter. > Unit: Percent > RO > > -power[1-*]_alarm 1 if the system is drawing more power than the > - cap allows; 0 otherwise. A poll notification is > - sent to this file when the power use exceeds the > - cap. This file only appears if the cap is known > - to be enforced by hardware. > +power[1-*]_alarm 1 if the system is drawing more power than cap > + or max allows; 0 otherwise. A poll notification > + is sent to this file when the power use exceeds > + the cap or max limit. If only cap is supported, > + this file only appears if the cap is known to be > + enforced by hardware. > RO > > power[1-*]_cap If power use rises above this limit, the > @@ -450,6 +451,18 @@ power[1-*]_cap_min Minimum cap that can be set. > Unit: microWatt > RO > > +power[1-*]_max Maximum power. > + Unit: microWatt > + RW > + > +power[1-*]_crit Critical maximum power. > + If power rises to or above this limit, the > + system will take drastic action to reduce power > + consumption, such as a system shutdown. At the > + very least, a power fault will be generated. > + Unit: microWatt > + RO Why RO and not RW as every other limit file? > + > ********** > * Energy * > ********** > @@ -471,8 +484,14 @@ limit-related alarms, not both. The driver should just reflect the hardware > implementation. > > in[0-*]_alarm > +in[0-*]_crit_alarm > +curr[1-*]_alarm > +curr[1-*]_crit_alarm > +power[1-*]_alarm > +power[1-*]_crit_alarm > fan[1-*]_alarm > temp[1-*]_alarm > +temp[1-*]_crit_alarm > Channel alarm > 0: no alarm > 1: alarm The limit-specific alarms (*_crit_alarm) go in the second section, below. And as a matter of fact, you've already added some of them there... > @@ -482,10 +501,17 @@ OR > > in[0-*]_min_alarm > in[0-*]_max_alarm > +in[0-*]_lcrit_alarm > +in[0-*]_crit_alarm > +curr[1-*]_lcrit_alarm > +curr[1-*]_crit_alarm No _min and _max alarm for curr? > +power[1-*]_min_alarm > +power[1-*]_max_alarm > fan[1-*]_min_alarm > fan[1-*]_max_alarm > temp[1-*]_min_alarm > temp[1-*]_max_alarm > +temp[1-*]_lcrit_alarm > temp[1-*]_crit_alarm > Limit alarm > 0: no alarm > @@ -497,7 +523,6 @@ to notify open diodes, unconnected fans etc. where the hardware > supports it. When this boolean has value 1, the measurement for that > channel should not be trusted. > > -in[0-*]_fault I've removed it already in a separate patch, so your patch won't apply if you try to remove it again. > fan[1-*]_fault > temp[1-*]_fault > Input fault condition In general, I'm happy with the proposed changes. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
