On 4/17/07, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> wrote:
quoted text
> On Monday 16 April 2007 15:14, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> > Problem is that ACPI methods are not documented at all (how am I
> > supposed to know that "G6T6" is the reading of the 12V rail?) while the
> > datasheet of hw monitoring chips (w83627ehf in my case) are public (more
> > or less).
>
> Yes, I see that it's attractive to use a single w83627ehf.c driver.
> For an ACPI driver, we'd have to build a list of PNP IDs, and possibly
> information about which methods read which information.  That's
> certainly more work.
>
> On the other hand, the ACPI driver would avoid the synchronization
> issues that started this whole thread.  That's a pretty compelling
> advantage.
>
> > Furthermore, sensor driver exposes all the reading of the chip
> > (e.g. in the DSDT I can't find the VSB or battery voltage).
>
> Maybe Asus didn't hook up those readings on the board.  I would
> guess that PC Probe doesn't expose the VSB or battery voltage either.

PC Probe does not. But the lines are wired and the readings (from
Linux) are sensible.

quoted text
> I'm sure you've seen these:
>   http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-October/014050.html
>   http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/AsusFormulaHacking

Actually I haven't, I've happily ignored ACPI until now ;-) My DSDT
doesn't look too bad, I may give it a try...

Luca
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/