Hi Jean,
On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 03:11:53PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On 09/08/2012 08:18 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 01:21:02AM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> >>On 09/07/2012 06:28 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:34:40PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> >>>>Signed-off-by: Kelly Anderson <kelly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>>Kelly Anderson (1):
> >>>> Add lm-sensors support for it8771 (Asus E350M1-I).
> >>>>
> >>>> drivers/hwmon/it87.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> >>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>Hi Kelly,
> >>>
> >>>both in one message (Signed-off is part of the commit log), please, and
> >>>
> >>>WARNING: line over 80 characters
> >>>#87: FILE: drivers/hwmon/it87.c:64:
> >>>+enum chips { it87, it8712, it8716, it8718, it8720, it8721, it8728, it8771,
> >>>it8782,
> >>>
> >>>Just a note for next time - no need to resend. We'll need to sort out what
> >>>to do with the patch, ie if we want to take the risk of applying it without
> >>>technical documentation.
> >>>
> >>>In this context - how does the fan output look like in your system ? Does it
> >>>make sense ? Also, can you control the fan speed with the pwm attributes,
> >>>and do the pwmX_auto_point4_XXX attributes report reasonable information ?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Guenter
> >>Yes, the fan speed seems appropriate when in auto mode (changes
> >>depending on load).
> >>
> >>Pwm fan control seems to work also, the fan speed changes as
> >>pwmcontrol runs it's check.
> >>
> >Does the number of fans reported match the number of fans in your system ?
> >How many fans are reported ?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Guenter
>
> Yes, the number of fans identified matches the system's
> configuration. I have one fan connected, with the E350M1-I's
> massive passive heatsink it's not necessary to have more than one.
> Lm-sensors does detect both fan headers.
>
> fan1 is the cpu fan.
> fan2 is the chassis fan.
>
> It might be useful to relabel fan1 to "CPU Fan" as is done on some
> other sensors.
>
> it8771-isa-0290
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> in0: +0.56 V (min = +2.78 V, max = +0.23 V) ALARM
> in1: +2.22 V (min = +1.64 V, max = +0.74 V) ALARM
> in2: +2.86 V (min = +1.31 V, max = +2.64 V) ALARM
> +3.3V: +3.34 V (min = +4.20 V, max = +5.40 V) ALARM
> in4: +2.22 V (min = +2.24 V, max = +0.67 V) ALARM
> in5: +2.93 V (min = +2.96 V, max = +0.92 V) ALARM
> in6: +2.22 V (min = +1.50 V, max = +1.98 V) ALARM
> 3VSB: +3.38 V (min = +5.14 V, max = +3.41 V) ALARM
> Vbat: +3.26 V
> fan1: 1175 RPM (min = 23 RPM)
> fan2: 0 RPM (min = 12 RPM) ALARM
> temp1: +40.0°C (low = -11.0°C, high = +94.0°C) sensor = thermistor
> temp2: +34.0°C (low = -26.0°C, high = +10.0°C) ALARM
> sensor = thermistor
> temp3: -8.0°C (low = -28.0°C, high = +63.0°C) sensor = thermistor
> intrusion0: OK
>
I am inclined to accept this patch, and also add support for IT8772E, assuming
it is fully compatible.
We have had a number of requests, it has been tested, OpenHardwareMonitor
supports it, and mosys as well as coreboot have extensive support for IT8772E.
So overall, even though we don't have access to data sheets, I think we know
enough and the risk is quite low.
Thoughts / comments / objections ?
Thanks,
Guenter
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
