On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 10:33 -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > Again, sorry for the late review. > > On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:35:03 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Add support for T0 and T1 temperature thresholds using the new sysfs ABI > > attributes tempX_thresholdY and tempX_thresholdY_triggered. > > > > This patch is based on commit c814a4c7c4aad795835583344353963a0a673eb0, which > > was reverted. For details on the threshold registers, see IA Manual vol 3A, > > which can be downloaded from here: > > http://download.intel.com/design/processor/manuals/253668.pdf > > > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/hwmon/coretemp | 8 ++ > > drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c | 160 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > 2 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp b/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp > > index 84d46c0..3c8dd70 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp > > +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp > > @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@ the Out-Of-Spec bit. Following table summarizes the exported sysfs files: > > All Sysfs entries are named with their core_id (represented here by 'X'). > > tempX_input - Core temperature (in millidegrees Celsius). > > tempX_max - All cooling devices should be turned on (on Core2). > > +tempX_threshold1 - Reflects value of CPU thermal threshold T0. > > +tempX_threshold1_triggered > > + - Reflects status of CPU thermal status register bit 6 > > + (THERM_STATUS_THRESHOLD0). > > +tempX_threshold2 - Reflects value of CPU thermal threshold T1. > > +tempX_threshold2_triggered > > + - Reflects status of CPU thermal status register bit 8 > > + (THERM_STATUS_THRESHOLD1). > > It's questionable whether we want to map the status bits to _triggered > files. I'd rather map the log bits THERM_LOG_THRESHOLD[01] to > _triggered, because these attributes are direction-neutral, and sticky. > The status bits merely show the result of the real-time comparison > between the current temperature and the threshold value, this is > something user-space can compute by itself. > > If we really want to expose the status bits, these shouldn't be > considered an alarm (as the thresholds can be used as low or high > temperature limits). _above may be a suitable suffix. But then again > I'm not sure if we really want to expose this. > Using THERM_LOG_THRESHOLD is fine with me, and I agree it makes more sense. Only question is what to do after it was read. Auto-reset it, or provide a write function to reset it ? I agree with the rest of your comments, and will make the necessary changes. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
