On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 08:38:04AM +0100, luke.leighton wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> modprobe it87 force_id=0x8720 > > > > Thanks for sharing your findings. Obviously I already knew about it > > all, but your post might help others in similar situations. > > with the right keywords, aaanything is possible :) > > >> also, the following page http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Devices was > >> also quite terse and not immediately very helpful. if the advice > >> about force_id had been on the wiki page, i would have saved about 2 > >> hours of searching. > > > > Good point. However I'm not sure where I would add the information and > > in what form. The force_id parameter isn't it87-specific, it is > > supported by 11 different hwmon drivers, covering something 20 or 30 > > different devices. In general it is also better if users can build a > > standalone driver because this gives them the right device name > > matching the configuration file for their board (if one exists.) > > in debian this is generally discouraged. in the work environment in > which i find myself it is a *definite* no. we have enough to deal > with in the fact that this is only available for 3.2.0 rather than > 2.6.32. we will need to do at least 2 to 3 months of testing before > 3.2.0 can be *considered* to be put into production. > And we are up to 3.9 already, and 2.6.32 was already dropped from the longterm supported kernel list. You are really running old kernels - by the time you start running 3.2, it may be getting close to EOL. > and we would need to either create a debian package for the > stand-alone driver or compile ... no, we would not be able to compile > on the box because that would mean that the 800 machines in the field > would need to have gcc installed, that would mean 100% CPU for short > durations which would disrupt the customer, so no, definitely a debian > package, and that's a lot of work. > > basically it is often completely impractical to use the standalone > driver, or quite a lot of work. > > > > That being said, I agree that not all users can build the standalone > > driver. > > ... or it's a significant burden to do so, as well as requiring > months of testing before going live. > I think Jean referred more to individual users and did not really have distributions or large scale deployments in mind. > > Also the cases where passing the force_id parameter works > > perfectly are rather rare. So I decided to add a note about force_id in > > the IT8728F entry only. > > that works. that works very well. H77N could do with being added to > the list of gigabyte motherboards in that entry, it only lists 67 so > far. > Might be better to remove all of them. The driver is, after all, for a SuperIO chipset, not for specific Intel boards, and the chip is used quite widely on many boards nowadays. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
