On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 17:07 -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Fri, 11 May 2012 08:49:43 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > From: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > On IT8782F, temp3 is only supported if UART6 is disabled. > > > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > v3: Resolve conflicts with previous patches. > > Only remove temp sysfs attributes if the to-be-removed sensor exists, > > to be in sync with the other attribute removal code. > > v2: Drop condition for IT8783F. On that chip, UART6 may be routed via JP4 to > > a different set of pins, so we can not reliably detect if temp3 and RI6 > > overlap or not. > > > > drivers/hwmon/it87.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > 1 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/it87.c b/drivers/hwmon/it87.c > > index 88771a5..1385320 100644 > > --- a/drivers/hwmon/it87.c > > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/it87.c > > (...) > > @@ -2016,6 +2040,11 @@ static int __devinit it87_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > data->in_scaled |= (1 << 7); /* in7 is VCCH5V */ > > } > > > > + data->has_temp = 0x07; > > + if (sio_data->skip_temp && > > + !(it87_read_value(data, IT87_REG_TEMP_EXTRA) & 0x80)) > > + data->has_temp &= ~sio_data->skip_temp; > > I don't like this. Right now it works because temp3 is the only input > that can be disabled. If there ever is another then it will break and > we may not notice. IMHO it should look more like: > > if ((sio_data->skip_temp & (1 << 2)) && > !(it87_read_value(data, IT87_REG_TEMP_EXTRA) & 0x80)) > data->has_temp &= ~(1 << 2); > > I would also suggest an additional test on chip type. Right now the > IT8782F is the only one setting sio_data->skip_temp but that might > change in the future. > Agreed. I'll send out a revised version in a minute. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
