On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:07:14 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > The attribute reflects an interval, not a rate. > > > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface | 12 +++++----- > > drivers/hwmon/adm1031.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface b/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > > index ff45d1f..df0cdd2 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > > +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface > > @@ -91,13 +91,13 @@ name The chip name. > > I2C devices get this attribute created automatically. > > RO > > > > -update_rate The rate at which the chip will update readings. > > - Unit: millisecond > > +update_interval The interval at which the chip or driver will update readings. > > I think I prefer the original wording. The attribute is really about > setting the register refresh rate at the hardware level. The fact that Only, it doesn't set any rates in the hardware. It sets the period (interval). If the unit of update_rate is changed to Hz, and the driver does hardware_timer_milliseconds = 1000/update_rate_Hz, THEN it will be correct to call it a rate... I'd rather have it in Hz, actually. I consider that more user-friendly. But that's just personal preference. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
