On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 05:40:28AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 02:51:00AM -0400, Jan Beulich wrote: > > >>> On 09.10.10 at 20:44, Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Turns out the ucode revision is already available via > > > ucode_cpu_info[cpu].cpu_sig.rev > > > unless I am missing something. > > > > But you're not suggesting to make coretemp.ko depend on > > microcode.ko, are you? > > > I am not really suggesting anything. Personally, I think the code is just fine > as it is. I would just like someone to Ack it before I would want to apply > it, and I happened to notice the above while I was looking for other places > where the microcode version is retrieved. > > On the contrary, the added dependency (which I had not realized) would be > a good argument against using ucode_cpu_info[]. > > Guenter > Acked-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx> --- We can apply Jan's clean v2 patch for coretemp. _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
