[lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for Fintek

[lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for Fintek

[Fred .]

I am using lm-sensors on a MSI P35 Neo (MS-7360) motherboard which
uses Fintek f71882fg super-I/O circuit.

The Fintek f71882fg is listed as supported by lm-sensors according to
the lm-sensors wiki.
Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Devices

This super-I/O does support chassis intrusion according to the Fintek datasheet.
Source: http://www.fintek.com.tw/files/productfiles/F71882_V028P.pdf

On the wiki, I also found a example configuration file for my MSI P35
Neo motherboard.
Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Configurations/MSI/P35-Neo

The config file includes references to Fintek f71882fg
Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/browser/lm-sensors/trunk/etc/sensors.conf.eg?revV43

My motherboard and super-io circuit does support chassis intrusion detection.
I know that lm-sensors does support chassis intrusion detection.
Does lm-sensors support this feature on my motherboard/superio?

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Jean Delvare]

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:13:16 +0100, Fred . wrote:
> I am using lm-sensors on a MSI P35 Neo (MS-7360) motherboard which
> uses Fintek f71882fg super-I/O circuit.
> 
> The Fintek f71882fg is listed as supported by lm-sensors according to
> the lm-sensors wiki.
> Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Devices
> 
> This super-I/O does support chassis intrusion according to the Fintek datasheet.
> Source: http://www.fintek.com.tw/files/productfiles/F71882_V028P.pdf
> 
> On the wiki, I also found a example configuration file for my MSI P35
> Neo motherboard.
> Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Configurations/MSI/P35-Neo
> 
> The config file includes references to Fintek f71882fg
> Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/browser/lm-sensors/trunk/etc/sensors.conf.eg?revV43
> 
> My motherboard and super-io circuit does support chassis intrusion detection.

Your chip does, yes. Are you certain your motherboard does? And does
your computer case do?

> I know that lm-sensors does support chassis intrusion detection.

No, at the moment lm-sensors 3 doesn't support chassis intrusion
detection.

> Does lm-sensors support this feature on my motherboard/superio?

Not yet.

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://khali.linux-fr.org/wishlist.html

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Fred,

Once again: please keep the mailing list Cc'd.

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:14:02 +0100, Fred . wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> >> Does lm-sensors support this feature on my motherboard/superio?
> >
> > Not yet.
>
> Then why does it say that lm-sensors does support chassis intrusion?
> Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/ProjectInformation
> Or is that just for the old lm-sensors 2 or something?

This is indeed a leftover from the lm-sensors 2 era. I've just fixed
that, thanks for reporting.

> When will lm-sensors have support for chassis intrusion?
> I hope soon. Please add support for it.

Spare time doesn't grow on tree, you know? It will take some time to
properly implement that, and it's not the most popular feature out
there (most probably because you need a case with a micro-switch and
most cases out there do not have one.)

I have created a ticket in our support system:
http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370

What do you have to offer? 

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://khali.linux-fr.org/wishlist.html

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Fred .]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> Hi Fred,
>
> Once again: please keep the mailing list Cc'd.
I am sorry for mail you instead of the list. I use GMail and clicked
on "Reply" instead of "Reply all".
I am not used to communicate over mailing-lists. My bad.

>
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:14:02 +0100, Fred . wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
>> >> Does lm-sensors support this feature on my motherboard/superio?
>> >
>> > Not yet.
>>
>> Then why does it say that lm-sensors does support chassis intrusion?
>> Source: http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/ProjectInformation
>> Or is that just for the old lm-sensors 2 or something?
>
> This is indeed a leftover from the lm-sensors 2 era. I've just fixed
> that, thanks for reporting.
Ah, okay. I see.
Thanks for fixing that.

>
>> When will lm-sensors have support for chassis intrusion?
>> I hope soon. Please add support for it.
>
> Spare time doesn't grow on tree, you know? It will take some time to
> properly implement that, and it's not the most popular feature out
> there (most probably because you need a case with a micro-switch and
> most cases out there do not have one.)
>
> I have created a ticket in our support system:
> http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370
>
> What do you have to offer?
Thanks for creating a ticket in the support system.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can offer anything. I live with my mom. :(

>
> --
> Jean Delvare
> http://khali.linux-fr.org/wishlist.html
>

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion

[Michael Hampton]

Fred . wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
>   
>>> When will lm-sensors have support for chassis intrusion?
>>> I hope soon. Please add support for it.
>>>       
>> Spare time doesn't grow on tree, you know? It will take some time to
>> properly implement that, and it's not the most popular feature out
>> there (most probably because you need a case with a micro-switch and
>> most cases out there do not have one.)
>>
>> I have created a ticket in our support system:
>> http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370
>>
>> What do you have to offer?
>>     
> Thanks for creating a ticket in the support system.
> Unfortunately, I don't think I can offer anything. I live with my mom. :(
>   

I'm also interested in chassis intrusion (not to mention having my
Winbond W83667HG chip fully supported in hwmon.c; see my previous
message to the list on that topic). I'd like to contribute, but I admit
I'm better at coding a standard than designing one. What does this
standard need to look like?

-- 
Homeland Stupidity <http://www.homelandstupidity.us/>

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Jean Delvare]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:40:22 +0100, Fred . wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> > I have created a ticket in our support system:
> > http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370
> >
> > What do you have to offer?
> Thanks for creating a ticket in the support system.
> Unfortunately, I don't think I can offer anything. I live with my mom. :(

This doesn't mean you can't help. You can help with ideas, code review,
testing or comments. Or you may have old hardware you no longer use
that could be useful to the lm-sensors project. Or own a CD you no
longer listen to and that happens to be part of my wish list ;)

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://khali.linux-fr.org/wishlist.html

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Michael,

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 08:08:04 -0500, Michael Hampton wrote:
> I'm also interested in chassis intrusion (not to mention having my
> Winbond W83667HG chip fully supported in hwmon.c; see my previous
> message to the list on that topic). I'd like to contribute, but I admit

I have reviewed the patch adding support for the W83667HG chip, and had
some objections. It's now up to the patch author to answer them and
submit a new patch...

> I'm better at coding a standard than designing one. What does this
> standard need to look like?

Basically, a new entry in Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface. An entry
in this file consists in:
* A file name, wisely chosen to fit in the rest of the interface, be
  non-ambiguous and allow for future extensions. I can't think of any
  obvious extension in the case of the chassis intrusion detection, but
  it doesn't hurt to think about it for a moment. For example, could
  there be chips with more than one chassis intrusion detection sensor?
* Possible values for that file, with their meaning.
* Whether this file can be written to, what should be written and what
  happens when you do.

Looking at how some drivers implemented it in the absence of a standard
(as far as I can see: adm9240, w83792d and w83793) may provide
interesting suggestions. Looking at other chips which support the
feature even though their driver doesn't yet may be useful as well.

I can add you to the Cc list of ticket #2370 if you want.

-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] Does lm-sensors support chassis intrusion for

[Fred .]

I propose we make a file that we call 'intrusion', but if you want to
have it open for extension,
such as multiple detectors, we could call it intrusion1 (leaving room
for intrusion2, etc).

If the file says 0, it means everything is cool.
If the file says 1, it means its triggered, and case is open.

We might want to be able to write to the file, in order to reset it.

Should we have an alarm file?
In that case, it would be intrusion1_alarm. In the sysfs-interface
file, that would be declared as;
intrusion[0-*]_alarm
Where 0 is no alarm, and is 1 alarm.

Here we have the file sysfs-interface.
http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/hwmon/sysfs-interface

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors