On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:22:14PM -0400, Chen Gong wrote: > 于 7/18/2010 10:10 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 写道: > > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >> All correct. I have a second concern after looking through the IA-32 > >> documentation. > >> > >> The package sensor is not supported for all chips, and there is only > >> one sensor per package (not per core). Yet, the code as written adds the > >> new sensor unconditionally. I think this needs to change to only create > >> the sysfs file if the sensor is supported by the CPU, and only once per core. > > > > It is a really good idea to never expose through sysfs something that > > isn't there. Alternatively, you can return errors like ENXIO, but you > > should only do that when you have no other choice (because, e.g. you > > cannot know beforehand whether a sensor will be available or not). > > > > If one can detect when processor packages and cores come and go, and one > > can ask the package and cores about the sensors that are really > > available, one can expose to sysfs just the sensors that are > > operational, and remove or add sensors when needed. > > > > Grrr, It looks like a separate driver for package thermal sensor is a > good idea ? Why ? Just make the sysfs entry conditional. All you need to do is to detect in the probe function if there is a package sensor, and only create the sysfs entry if there is. Plus, make sure that it is only created once. _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
