Re: i5k_amb temp_mid replacement

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On 10/7/21 12:24 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/7/21 10:59 AM, Armin Wolf wrote:
>> Am 07.10.21 um 18:30 schrieb Guenter Roeck:
>>> On 10/7/21 7:20 AM, Armin Wolf wrote:
>>>> Am 02.10.21 um 16:04 schrieb Guenter Roeck:
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 12:13:53AM +0200, Armin Wolf wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while trying to convert i5k_temp to the new hwmon API to resolve
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208693,
>>>>>> i was asking myself whether or not temp_mid could be replaced with a
>>>>>> standard sysfs attribute?
>>>>>> Since afaik temp_mid and temp_max are both temperature limits, they
>>>>>> could potentially be replaced with
>>>>>> temp_max and temp_crit.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Quite likely. Unfortunately, the chipset documentation is not available
>>>>> to the public, so it is difficult to determine what those temperatures
>>>>> actually mean.
>>>>>
>>>>> Guenter
>>>> Darrick Wong says the chipset documentation would support such a change.
>>>> However, he fears that the changed meaning of tempX_max could confuse
>>>> userspace
>>>> programs.
>>>> But i think the current not using standard attribute names will confuse
>>>> even more
>>>> programms.
>>>
>>> I still don't know what temperature limits temp_mid and temp_max actually
>>> reflect, so I still can not really comment.
>>>
>>> Guenter
>> "Intel 6400/6402 Advanced Memory Buffer" seems to document that.
> 
> Ah, thanks.
> 
>  From the description, it should be:
> 
> TEMPLO -> temp1_max
> TEMPMID -> temp1_crit
> TEMPHI -> temp1_emergency
> 

Scratch that. I am misreading the document.

TEMPLO -> temp1_min
TEMPMID -> temp1_max
TEMPHI -> temp1_crit

is fine.

Guenter