Re: [lm-sensors] Asus atk0110 driver

[Gabriel C <crazy@frugalware.org>]

Luca Tettamanti wrote:

> Il Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:06:01AM +0200, Jean Delvare ha scritto: 
>> Hi Gabriel,
>>
>> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:15:51 +0200, Gabriel C wrote:
>>> I've tested the driver with linux-next on my P5E-VM DO motherboard.
>>>
>>> The driver seems to work , the values / data in  /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/device/*
>>> seems to be the same like what the BIOS reports.
>>>
>>> However how do I get sensors to display the data from atk driver ?
>>> I guess I have to patch lm-sensors ?
>> For lm-sensors 2.10.x, yes, you'd need to patch libsensors and sensors
>> and virtually every monitoring application out there.
>>
>> But the preferred solution is to just upgrade to lm-sensors 3.0.x,
>> which automatically detects the device features, so every new driver is
>> supported right away.
> 
> Not really, the hwmon device is linked directly to the ACPI node in the
> sysfs hierarchy (via subsystem link): lm-sensors just ignores it.
> 
> Patch is simple enough though:
> 
> ---
>  Makefile      |    6 +++---
>  lib/access.c  |    2 ++
>  lib/data.c    |    5 +++++
>  lib/sensors.h |    1 +
>  lib/sysfs.c   |    5 +++++
>  5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: lib/access.c
> =================================> --- lib/access.c	(revision 5296)
> +++ lib/access.c	(working copy)
> @@ -349,6 +349,8 @@
>  		return "SPI adapter";
>  	case SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_VIRTUAL:
>  		return "Virtual device";
> +	case SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ACPI:
> +		return "ACPI device";
>  	}
>  
>  	/* bus types with several instances */
> Index: lib/sensors.h
> =================================> --- lib/sensors.h	(revision 5296)
> +++ lib/sensors.h	(working copy)
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
>  #define SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_PCI		2
>  #define SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_SPI		3
>  #define SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_VIRTUAL	4
> +#define SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ACPI		5
>  #define SENSORS_BUS_NR_ANY		(-1)
>  #define SENSORS_BUS_NR_IGNORE		(-2)
>  
> Index: lib/sysfs.c
> =================================> --- lib/sysfs.c	(revision 5296)
> +++ lib/sysfs.c	(working copy)
> @@ -579,6 +579,11 @@
>  			entry.chip.addr = 0;
>  		entry.chip.bus.type = SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ISA;
>  		entry.chip.bus.nr = 0;
> +	} else
> +	if ((!subsys || !strcmp(subsys, "acpi")) &&
> +	    sscanf(dev_name, "%*[a-zA-Z0-9_]:%d", &entry.chip.addr) = 1) {
> +		entry.chip.bus.type = SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ACPI;
> +		entry.chip.bus.nr = 0;
>  	} else {
>  		/* Ignore unknown device */
>  		err = 0;
> Index: lib/data.c
> =================================> --- lib/data.c	(revision 5296)
> +++ lib/data.c	(working copy)
> @@ -111,6 +111,8 @@
>  		res->bus.type = SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_SPI;
>  	else if (!strncmp(name, "virtual", dash - name))
>  		res->bus.type = SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_VIRTUAL;
> +	else if (!strncmp(name, "acpi", dash - name))
> +		res->bus.type = SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ACPI;
>  	else
>  		goto ERROR;
>  	name = dash + 1;
> @@ -174,6 +176,9 @@
>  	case SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_VIRTUAL:
>  		return snprintf(str, size, "%s-virtual-%x", chip->prefix,
>  				chip->addr);
> +	case SENSORS_BUS_TYPE_ACPI:
> +		return snprintf(str, size, "%s-acpi-%x", chip->prefix,
> +				chip->addr);
>  	}
>  
>  	return -SENSORS_ERR_CHIP_NAME;
> 
> With the patch applied sensors is able to display all the data:
> 
> atk0110-acpi-0
> Adapter: ACPI device
> Vcore Voltage:      +1.12 V  (min =  +0.85 V, max =  +1.60 V)
>  +3.3 Voltage:      +3.31 V  (min =  +2.97 V, max =  +3.63 V)
>  +5 Voltage:        +5.12 V  (min =  +4.50 V, max =  +5.50 V)
>  +12 Voltage:      +12.41 V  (min = +10.20 V, max = +13.80 V)
> CPU FAN Speed:     2860 RPM  (min =  600 RPM)
> CHASSIS1 FAN Speed:   0 RPM  (min =  800 RPM)
> CHASSIS2 FAN Speed:   0 RPM  (min =  800 RPM)
> POWER FAN Speed:      0 RPM  (min =  800 RPM)
> CPU Temperature:    +48.5°C  (high = +60.0°C, crit = +95.0°C)
> MB Temperature:     +42.0°C  (high = +45.0°C, crit = +95.0°C)


Works fine here too , thx Luca :)

> 
>>> Luca what do you think about creating  a proper patch for the driver too and send it over to 
>>> Greg to be included in his linux-staging tree ? I think that way it will get more testing.
> 
> Will do ;)


Thx again :)

> 
> Luca


Gabriel



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