Dave,
The answers are inlined.
Le 03/03/2011 10:36, Dave Airlie a écrit :
Martin,
you probably should have cc'ed Matthew since it was his patch you based this on,
and I think he can provide a good explaination.
I knew he was monitoring the nouveau ML. He provided a good explanation
but forgot to CC the nouveau ML.
Could someone in the lm-sensors mailing list forward the most important
thread?
to clarify some points,
radeon does probably want something exactly like this, we just haven't gotten to
it completely yet, I'd rather not have two drivers in the kernel for
exact same hardware,
and I believe sharing the hwmon code to do what we want is a good plan since you
don't go around reinventing wheels, but if hwmon/i2c maintainers have
no interest
it leaves with little choice but to implement about 5-10 i2c drivers
again in drm codebase.
Maybe hwmon/i2c maintainers could suggest a cleaner way to implement
what we want,
which I think I can summarize as
a) access to monitored values in-kernel
b) no userspace access to the same values except via sanitised via the driver.
a) is mandatory, b) would be great!
though I'm not following this as closely as I should so I may have
missed something.
I don't think you missed anything but long argue on the lm-sensors ML.
Dave.
The reason why I didn't answer on this matter earlier was that I was in
the process
of moving from one city to another. I only got the internet access on
both my computers
yesterday evening and I was planing to restart the process this week end.
It's good to see you we are not the only one needing this.
Martin
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
