On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:27:41AM -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > On 15-11-2013 03:43, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Eduardo, > > > > Hello Jean! > > > Sorry for joining the discussion a little late, I could never find the > > time to look into this patch series so far. > > Well, better late than never, that's what it is said, isn't it? :-) > Thanks for arranging the time to look at these patches. > > The patch series have been looked and contributed by several people and > a couple o maintainers now. Starts to be way better than the original > RFC. The core idea still holds though. > > > > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:46:08 -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > >> This patch adds to lm75 temperature sensor the possibility > >> to expose itself as thermal zone device, registered on the > >> thermal framework. > >> > >> The thermal zone is built only if a device tree node > >> describing a thermal zone for this sensor is present > >> inside the lm75 DT node. Otherwise, the driver behavior > >> will be the same. > >> > >> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Acked-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > On HWMON side, I got Guenter's solid contributions, as you can see. > Not an argument. I am not perfect, and Jean has a number of valid points. Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
