On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 21:45 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 12:09:52AM -0400, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 18:49 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 09:35:19PM -0400, Matthew Manuel wrote: > > > > Should it be possible to add support for these now that the SDK was released? > > > > > > > > http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/Intel_Quiet_System_Technology_Software_Development_Kit/ > > > > > > > The programmer's reference manual points to http://www.openamt.org for a linux driver. > > > > The driver just does a transport of commands from/to the firmware. > > It pity though it was never merged upstream. > > > > The so long waited QST SDK however specifies what to send, and it looks > > good. > > The PDF included nice detailed description of QST 2.0, while SDK sources > > (which are more or less useless other that a good source of > > documentation, contain headers that declare commands for QST 1.0, so it > > really all covered. More that that, I see that it even included > > description on how to manually control the fans if BIOS didn't lock that > > up, and passthrough mode to talk to sensors (again if bios didn't lock > > that). > > > > Cool stuff it seems. > > Too bad it took so many years, my desktop is quite old now. > > > Usually Intel is pretty good nowadays in pushing code into the kernel. > They would be the natural entity to do it ... They tried a bit to push heci driver, it even was in staging for a while, but then (correct if I am wrong) no more effort was done. Regardless of that we will need a QST driver on top of heci, and preferably in the kernel. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
