Re: Another it87 patch.

From: Zephaniah E. Hull (warp@mercury.d2dc.net)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 16:40:16 EST


On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 10:50:39AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 04:25:24AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > This is against my last.
>
> And this is against that one.

And this against that, oi.

Don't provide min/max for in8, which allowed one to scribble on
registers one should not be messing with. (My fault, oops.)

The setting of the temp high/low registers was off by one, not mine this
time. While I was at it, I reordered a few other register accesses to
be base 0 instead of base 1.

The temp interface was slightly incorrect, degrees * 100 instead of
degrees * 1000, also fixed.

And lastly, when changing the fan count divisor, fix up the min setting
to still be roughly the same. (Previously the meaning of the value in
the register changed, but not the value itself, resulting in, undesired
surprises.)

This one is attached instead of appended, because of the fact that I'm
also including a perl script.

The script parses /etc/sensors.conf, and scans through what I /hope/ is
the proper sysfs tree to find sensor data, giving output that is roughly
in the same ballpark of the sensors command, except that it actually
works with the sysfs interface.

It is far from perfect, the code is a mess, and it does not do things
like conversions between degrees C and degrees F.

If you want it to set things, run with the single argument of '-s'.

There is one new command for the /etc/sensors.conf, mostly because I
could not be bothered to try to dig up the alarm settings for every
single chip that is supported, so instead you get to do
'alarm_bit in0 8', if the 8th bit of the alarm bitmask goes to the in0
input.

Holler if problems show up, however I can make no promises, this was a
quick job just so that I can use things.

-- 
	1024D/E65A7801 Zephaniah E. Hull <warp@babylon.d2dc.net>
	   92ED 94E4 B1E6 3624 226D  5727 4453 008B E65A 7801
	    CCs of replies from mailing lists are requested.

Well, of course. That's what Unix sysadmins do. We make things work. Even if they're things which are outside our job description or supposed area of expertise.

As to the other proposal of breaking them for 6 months first, I will offer a quote from an MCSE I once met:

"You're a Unix sysadmin? You're the bad guys. You keep things working."

Pretty obvious who gets paid when things break, and who gets paid when they don't. -- Dan Birchall in the Scary Devil Monastery.




- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:29 EST