Jean, Thank you very much for your support and explanation. Please find my comments in line. Best Regards, Krunal Patel --- On Tue, 21/6/11, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: sensor details for W83627HG-AW > To: "krunal patel" <krunal_smiles@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Guenter Roeck" <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tuesday, 21 June, 2011, 5:20 PM > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 12:40:49 +0530 > (IST), krunal patel wrote: > > Hi Jean, > > Its working now. Thank you very much for your patch. > > dmesg output-------------------- > > w83627hf: Found W83627HF chip at 0x290 > > Using 6-bit VID table for VIA C7-D CPU > > > > # sensors -------------- > > w83627hf-isa-0290 > > Adapter: ISA adapter > > in0: +0.69 V (min = +0.00 V, max = > +4.08 V) > > in1: +1.06 V (min = +0.00 V, max = > +4.08 V) > > in2: +3.30 V (min = +2.82 V, max = > +3.79 V) > > in3: +2.99 V (min = +3.57 V, max = > +1.98 V) ALARM > > in4: +3.28 V (min = +1.98 V, max = > +4.05 V) > > in5: +3.30 V (min = +3.57 V, max = > +3.30 V) ALARM > > in6: +3.33 V (min = +1.78 V, max = > +0.53 V) ALARM > > in7: +3.30 V (min = +0.77 V, max = > +2.29 V) ALARM > > in8: +3.52 V (min = +3.06 V, max = > +0.64 V) ALARM > > fan1: 0 RPM (min = 13775 RPM, div = > 2) ALARM > > fan2: 0 RPM (min = -1 RPM, div = > 2) ALARM > > fan3: 0 RPM (min = 3515 RPM, div = 2) > ALARM > > temp1: +52.0 C (high = +9.0 C, hyst = > +32.0 C) ALARM sensor = thermistor > > temp2: +38.5 C (high = +120.0 C, hyst = > +115.0 C) sensor = diode > > temp3: -48.0 C (high = +120.0 C, hyst = > +115.0 C) sensor = thermistor > > cpu0_vid: +1.212 V > > beep_enable: enabled > > According to the documentation I have, your CPU should be > running at > 0.684 V (assuming it is a ULV variant), so in0 is Vcore. It > does not > match cpu0_vid, but the other possible VID decoding table > wouldn't > either. So I think that the VID pins are simply not > properly routed to > your monitoring chip. > > Ah, stupid me. Of course they aren't. The W83627HF only has > 5 VID pins, > so you can't route a 6-bit VID value to it... > > So basically this means that you can ignore the cpu0_vid > value reported > by the w83627hf driver, it's bogus. Ideally the drivers > would notice > the mismatch and wouldn't expose a VID value which can't be > correct. I > don't have the time to fix it now so I've created a support > ticket for > later: > http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2383 > > Could you please install the msr-tools package, load the > msr driver, > and run as root: > # rdmsr -x 0x198 > and report the result. > Following is output you asked for # rdmsr -x 0x198 400050004000500 > BTW you should also be able to use the via-cputemp driver. > Didn't > sensors-detect suggest that? > I didn't used sensors-detect because it was wasting my time in resolving perl issues in my system. So I opened case, located chip and loaded related module. > > I looked into driver code and hwmon related code. All > sensor data is exported to user space using sysfs. > > One thing I understood is there is no interrupt > mechanism in sensor chip so we need to read data from chip's > memory. So for periodic data we need to do polling at > userspace (like sensord). > > Yes, this is correct, except that _some_ devices actually > support > interrupts. But libsensors currently doesn't support that, > and most > drivers don't implement it anyway. > > > Can I implement timer in driver and do polling in > Kernel? > > Technically you certainly can, but I very much doubt that > such code > would be accepted in the kernel. If polling is necessary, > then it is > better done in user-space than in the kernel, because > user-space can > choose the polling set and period depending on the exact > needs. > > If you think that in-kernel polling has an advantage, > please argue. > I thought kernel timer is lighter then application in userspace. > > What I want to do is get userspace event only when > Alarm is raised. If I implement timer and netlink > communication in driver will it be correct way to do it? As > I do not find any other way. > > I am no expert in this area, but I see no reason to go with > netlink, it > seems to me that poll/select on the relevant alarm files > themselves > should work. Guenter, I think you discussed this some times > ago? > > Krunal, please also search for "poll notification" in > Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface. This suggests that a > subset of the > attributes implement poll support already. I didn't look > into this and > won't have time to do so, sorry. > I am not find related info in linux-2.6.27.45, I will look in latest version. > But again this only applies to devices which raise > interrupts on alarm, > so that no in-kernel polling is needed. > > -- > Jean Delvare > _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
