Hi Jean, On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 08:07:07AM -0500, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:43:39 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > What about bit 3 (USF) in this enhanced configuration register? When > > set, it would affect the way we encode and decode _max and _crit > > temperature limits, right? > > BTW, if you agree but don't have time to work on this, I would be > perfectly fine with a check at probe time that would complain (and > eventually bail out) if the way the chip is configured is not properly > supported by the driver. If anyone needs the feature, it can be added > later. > Gives me something to do if I need some distraction ;). It will need some thinking, so I may choose the complain option for now and submit a patch later. Bailing out seems a bit harsh - as are temperatures above 127 C anyway. Do you remember why you did not add support for the remote temperature offset registers ? Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
