On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:53:09AM -0400, Jonathan Cameron wrote: [ ... ] > > > > Based on this list, I suggest adding the following attributes to the ABI. > > > > in[0-*]_input_lowest > > in[0-*]_input_highest > > in[0-*]_average > > in[0-*]_reset_history > > > > curr[1-*]_input_lowest > > curr[1-*]_input_highest > > curr[1-*]_average > > curr[1-*]_reset_history > > > > temp[1-*]_input_lowest > > temp[1-*]_input_highest > > temp[1-*]_average > > temp[1-*]_reset_history > > > > It might also be necessary to modify the sensors command to support both instantaneous > > and average/peak power readings at the same time. > How are you going to do peak power? > power already has power[1-*]_average power[1-*]_input_highest power[1-*]_input_lowest power[1-*]_reset_history Also, turns out that the following attributes for current sensors already exist. curr[1-*]_average curr[1-*]_lowest curr[1-*]_highest curr[1-*]_reset_history curr_reset_history so I decided to stick with that terminology and use it for voltage and temperature sensors in my proposed patch. > Otherwise, Looks sensible. Ran into this in IIO as well, we went with peak, but highest / lowest > works just as well. (not seen the minimum version yet) I thought about using peak too, but since lowest/highest is already used, think it is better to stick with it. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
