From: j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl (Hans de Goede)
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [lm-sensors] The Abit uGuru saga
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:29:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44A27646.8020703@hhs.nl> (raw)
Hi All,
With the Abit uGuru driver being upstream now it has get some more
exposure. 3 people sofar have contacted me that the driver does not work
with the latest generation of Abit motherboards.
One of them has been so kind todo a bit of reverse engineering and has
managed to give me the correct handshake / protocol to atleast read the
sensors. I'm pretty confident I've also found the sensor settings (but I
can only read them for now).
These newer uGuru's while similar are so much different that I think
they need / warrant a new driver. Putting support for them into the
current driver would be a big kludge.
With this in mind the question becomes: how do we call this newer
driver? I'm tending towards the very original "abituguru2" as name. An
other option would be abit_ac2005 as AC2005 is how Abit seems to call
them internally (that is what the dll is named in the new windows
software and the name is used in Abit ini files). However it turns out
that the older uGuru's are probably called AC2003 by Abit intern, so
then the name of the older driver would be wrong. Also I don't think
that calling the drivers AC200X is going to help the end user find the
correct driver for its motherboard. Maybe abituguru2005 ?
This new uGuru stuff has also lead me to 2 more questions:
1) With the new uGuru I'm able to read a motherboard type from the uGuru
and with this type I can determine the exact sensor configuration (of
known motherboards) including the labels for the sensors. Now I really
want to keep all this knowledge in one place. So I'm thinking about
giving all the sensors a _label sysfs attribute and write a little
userspace program which can generate a (part of) sensors.conf based on
these _label sysfs files. Does this sound ok?
2) The current abituguru will load (as in modprobe) with the newer
uGuru's and create its platform device, as the simple test done in
module_init also succeeds on the uguru2005. However the more
comprehensive test in the drivers probe function fails on the
uguru2005. This has the end result that when the old driver gets loaded
on the uguru2005 it will create a:
/sys/bus/plaform/devices/abituguru.224 dir
Which is mostly empty.
Is there anyway to detect the driver probe function failing from
module_init. so that then the platform device can be destroyed and
module_init can exit with an error?
Regards,
Hans
reply other threads:[~2006-06-28 12:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=44A27646.8020703@hhs.nl \
--to=j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl \
--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.