From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Bidewell Subject: Re: Possible CPUFreq governor Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:10:37 -0400 Message-ID: <426FB97D.3040701@alumni.clemson.edu> References: <53866.130.127.49.120.1114558769.squirrel@130.127.49.120> <20050427105350.GX2298@poupinou.org> <426F84A8.7040000@alumni.clemson.edu> <20050427135402.GZ2298@poupinou.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20050427135402.GZ2298@poupinou.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Bruno Ducrot Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk Bruno Ducrot wrote: >On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:25:12AM -0400, Mark Bidewell wrote: > > >>Thank you very much for your imput. I will make those adjustments in >>the next patch. The temperature was obtained by reading >>/proc/acpi/thermal_zone/THM/temperature for a usermode daemon. >> >> >> > >You mean you cant use ACPI thermal stuff in order to get it right? > > > If I understand your question right, I have looked into this. The functions which extract the raw temperature data use ACPI control structures which appear to be created automagically as part of the file open process. I have not been able to determine were they are created and so have not been able to call them directly (I am no expert on this by any means so I could be totally off base here). This would leave opening the /proc file inside the kernel as the only other option and I am not sure that making those kind of calls from kernel mode would be a good idea.