From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [RFC PATCH] Allow the configuration register to be
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:41:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100913194121.38c1e502@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1284386867-21650-1-git-send-email-shubhrajyoti@ti.com>
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:51:09 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:33:56AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > Not that I know of. At least there's no standard sysfs attribute for
> > that. We have one for update rate, but it's fairly recent. Having one
> > for resolution would certainly make sense for simple temperature
> > sensors.
>
> I found the following attributes used for the update inverval.
>
> adt7470.c auto_update_interval
> lm95241.c rate
> adm1031.c update_rate
>
> Not sure about adt7470.c, ince it reflects an automatic interval, but would it make sense
> to update lm95241.c to use the standard attribute ?
Yes it would.
> On a side note, update_rate (or rate) doesn't really reflect its use. A "rate"
> would be measured in updates/time, not in absolute time. Or, in other words,
> it reflects a frequency, not an interval. So we are really talking about intervals.
> Not sure if that is worth bitching about, but since the attribute is quite new
> it might make sense to think about it.
Jonathan Cameron (Cc'd) had a similar concern:
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2010-May/028596.html
Nobody seemed to care back then. I can't disagree with both of you, but
OTOH I don't feel too strongly about it either. So if someone submits a
patch making things better, that's fine with me, but I won't spend my
own time on it.
> Resolution would have to be sensor dependent, since each sensor can have its own resolution.
> Would be nice to have an attribute for that.
Not too sure about that. I had the same reaction at first, but do we
actually know of devices where the resolution isn't global?
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-13 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-13 14:19 [lm-sensors] [RFC PATCH] Allow the configuration register to be Shubhrajyoti D
2010-09-13 14:27 ` Jean Delvare
2010-09-13 14:55 ` Datta, Shubhrajyoti
2010-09-13 15:33 ` Jean Delvare
2010-09-13 16:51 ` Guenter Roeck
2010-09-13 17:41 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2010-09-13 18:09 ` Guenter Roeck
2010-09-14 8:08 ` Jean Delvare
2010-09-14 12:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2010-09-14 14:57 ` Jean Delvare
2010-09-14 16:04 ` Guenter Roeck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100913194121.38c1e502@hyperion.delvare \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.