From: Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl>
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [RFC] Support of chassis intrusion detection
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:37:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <499D285D.2020800@hhs.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090217230215.5106b6c0@hyperion.delvare>
Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A number of users have asked us to support the chassis intrusion
> detection feature which some hardware monitoring chip have. I've
> created a ticket for this:
> http://www.lm-sensors.org/ticket/2370
> Here is a proposal.
>
> sysfs interface
> =======>
> chassis_intrusion
> Chassis intrusion detection
> 0: OK
> 1: intrusion detected
> RW
> Writing 0 clears the detection flag.
> Writing other values is unsupported.
>
> It's not totally clear whether clearing should be done by writing 0 or
> 1. 0 is more respectful of traditional sysfs semantics that you should
> be able to read back what you just wrote, so it has my vote.
>
> drivers
> ===>
> Drivers adm9240, w83792d and w83793 implement this feature in
> non-standard ways. They should be converted to the new, standard
> interface.
>
> libsensors
> =====
>
> Either
>
> SENSORS_FEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = 0x19
> SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = SENSORS_FEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION << 8
>
> or rename SENSORS_FEATURE_BEEP_ENABLE to SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC and
>
> SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_BEEP_ENABLE = SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC << 8
> SENSORS_SUBFEATURE_CHASSIS_INTRUSION = (SENSORS_FEATURE_MISC << 8) + 1
>
> sensors
> ===>
> Reading the value of the chassis intrusion detection subfeature is done
> like for any other subfeature.
>
> Writing, OTOH, can't be handled the same as writing limits, because we
> certainly don't want to clear the flag automatically at lm_sensors
> start or restart time. So we could add a dedicated flag to clear the
> chassis intrusion detection flag (e.g. "sensors --clear-chassis").
>
> If anyone has objections or comments, please speak up.
>
looks good to me, but I wonder if we should not prepare for the case where an
IC has more then one chasis intrusion detection pin.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-19 9:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-17 22:02 [lm-sensors] [RFC] Support of chassis intrusion detection Jean Delvare
2009-02-18 13:20 ` Matt Roberds
2009-02-18 13:54 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-18 15:37 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-19 9:37 ` Hans de Goede [this message]
2009-02-19 10:51 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-19 13:00 ` Matt Roberds
2009-02-19 17:42 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-19 18:44 ` Hans de Goede
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=499D285D.2020800@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.