Hi Luca, On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:03:47 +0200, Luca Tettamanti wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:39 AM, ÐÐÐÐÑÐÐ ÐÑÑÐÐ <taviscaron@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello. > > I have Jetway NC92-330-LF and interesting in your post: > > http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2010-April/028281.html > > > > I have compiled attached driver, but it still does not work: > > > > f71882fg: Found f71862fg chip at 0x290, revision 1 > > ACPI: resource f71882fg [io 0x0290-0x0297] conflicts with ACPI region IP__ > > [??? 0x00000295-0x00000296 flags 0x5f] > > ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it > > instead of the native driver > > > > Maybe i can help in something (testing, log, etc)? Working driver will be > > very good. > > There was a bit of round trip with the user to adjust the driver. I'm > attaching a version that was confirmed working, but it's an ugly ugly > ugly hack. In fact if Jean sees this he's going to ask my maintainer > badge back :P Not as long as you keep helping us make users happy :) > Keep the conversation on the list, we might get some insight on how to > proceed with this... If I understand correctly, the ACPI BIOS on this board (and hopefully other Jetway boards) implements functions to read and write bytes from/to the hardware monitoring chip, and you are hacking the f71882fg driver to make use of them when available instead of direct I/O? That's quite interesting, even though I think I would play it safe at first and only allow reading from the chip. Who knows if the BIOS includes code with read-modify-write cycles? Did you check if these functions were callled by the BIOS itself? Of course I see that your code is currently a hack only working for this board, or at best for several Jetway boards with a device supported by the f71882fg driver. Ultimately it would be better to have a generalized abstraction layer, so that every I/O-based hwmon driver can use any available ACPI byte access function, without having to hard-code every board/chip combination. That being said, if you can get this specific board to work, and even if the code looks ugly, I have no objection. Our main objective is to let users monitor their hardware now, not in 2 years. And it is easier to generalize something if we have several implementations for specific cases already. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
