Hi Ira, Guenter, On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:07:08 -0800, Ira W. Snyder wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 01:48:33PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Question for the ltc4215 driver, though, is if power1_alarm is > > appropriate in the first place. After reading the datasheet, I noticed > > that it does not really report a power problem, but "output voltage > > low". So I wonder it the attribute in the driver should be "in2_alarm" > > or possibly "in2_min_alarm" instead of power1_alarm, and if the power > > attributes should be dropped entirely. > > Reviewers (probably Jean) suggested the power1_input and power1_alarm > files when I submitted the driver. (I'm not placing blame, just > explaining where they came from.) Probably not, the ltc4215 driver went upstream through Andrew Morton because I lacked the time to do a proper review. > In both the ltc4215 and ltc4245 drivers, the power outputs are > calculated purely in software. This is very convenient for users of the > sensors utility. > > I would like to keep the power1_input sysfs file. I have no problem with this, at least as long as libsensors doesn't offer a way to bind current sensors to voltage sensors. > I do not have any > objections to changing power1_alarm to in2_alarm or in2_min_alarm. in2_* doesn't seem right for a voltage output alarm. I'd say such a feature doesn't belong to the hwmon ABI in the first place. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
