Hi!
What is preventing lm-sensors from being merged into kernel? Alan,
given nice patch for current kernel, would you accept lm-sensors into
your kernel?
Pavel
--
Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net.
What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email?
> What is preventing lm-sensors from being merged into kernel? Alan,
> given nice patch for current kernel, would you accept lm-sensors into
> your kernel?
Linus call not mine.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> > What is preventing lm-sensors from being merged into kernel? Alan,
> > given nice patch for current kernel, would you accept lm-sensors into
> > your kernel?
>
> Linus call not mine.
Really? I know he controls what goes in the mainline, but I thought you
put in what you found useful in your kernel. Certainly rmap was there
until it was old enough to vote.
Clearly lm_sensors do have value in a production environment.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
> Really? I know he controls what goes in the mainline, but I thought you
> put in what you found useful in your kernel. Certainly rmap was there
> until it was old enough to vote.
>
> Clearly lm_sensors do have value in a production environment.
2.4-ac is a bit different. 2.5-ac is stuff Im holding to get a working
2.5 to test with. Im trying to avoid getting anything in it Linus wont
have taken by 2.6.0
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Really? I know he controls what goes in the mainline, but I thought you
> > put in what you found useful in your kernel. Certainly rmap was there
> > until it was old enough to vote.
> >
> > Clearly lm_sensors do have value in a production environment.
>
> 2.4-ac is a bit different. 2.5-ac is stuff Im holding to get a working
> 2.5 to test with. Im trying to avoid getting anything in it Linus wont
> have taken by 2.6.0
Okay, thanks. I was hoping since lm_sensors were proposed before the
freeze, relatively stable, and highly useful that they might get in.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]> writes:
>Okay, thanks. I was hoping since lm_sensors were proposed before the
>freeze, relatively stable, and highly useful that they might get in.
As most of the I2C code is in, I would consider the lm_sensors mainly
as "drivers" so they wouldn't be hit by the freeze.
If you want it in, lobby it with Linus. I'm sure that he is open to
reason (Hah! :-) ).
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH [email protected]
Am Schwabachgrund 22 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 [email protected]
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20
Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> Bill Davidsen <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>>Okay, thanks. I was hoping since lm_sensors were proposed before the
>>freeze, relatively stable, and highly useful that they might get in.
>
>
> As most of the I2C code is in, I would consider the lm_sensors mainly
> as "drivers" so they wouldn't be hit by the freeze.
To tangent a bit, I was somewhat disappointed when the I2C kernel
merging guy disappeared... :(
Sometime back, I had put the sensors support in the 2.4.17 SMP kernel. It
did not give me any problems and we have been using it successfully. The
following are some of the details:
Created a CONFIG_SENSORS entry and an entry for every sensor type
#
# Hardware sensors support
#
CONFIG_SENSORS=y
# CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1021 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1024 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1025 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM9240 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_DS1621 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_FSCPOS is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_GL518SM is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_GL520SM is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_MAXILIFE is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_IT87 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_MTP008 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_LM75 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_LM78 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_LM80 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_LM87 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_SIS5595 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_THMC50 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_W83781D is not set
CONFIG_SENSORS_W83782D=y
And in the Makefile:
DRIVERS-$(CONFIG_SENSORS) += drivers/sensors/sensor.o
Put all the sensor related drivers in drivers/sensors and created a
Makefile:
O_TARGET := sensor.o
export-objs := sensors.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS) += sensors.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1021) += adm1021.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1024) += adm1024.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM1025) += adm1025.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_ADM9240) += adm9240.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_BT869) += bt869.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_DDCMON) += ddcmon.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_DS1621) += ds1621.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_EEPROM) += eeprom.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_FSCPOS) += fscpos.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_GL518SM) += gl518sm.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_GL520SM) += gl520sm.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_IT87) += it87.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_LM75) += lm75.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_LM78) += lm78.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_LM80) += lm80.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_LM87) += lm87.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_MAXILIFE) += maxilife.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_MTP008) += mtp008.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SIS5595) += sis5595.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_THMC50) += thmc50.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_VIA686A) += via686a.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_W83781D) += w83781d.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_W83782D) += w83782d.o
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 2:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LM sensors into kernel?
Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> Bill Davidsen <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>>Okay, thanks. I was hoping since lm_sensors were proposed before the
>>freeze, relatively stable, and highly useful that they might get in.
>
>
> As most of the I2C code is in, I would consider the lm_sensors mainly
> as "drivers" so they wouldn't be hit by the freeze.
To tangent a bit, I was somewhat disappointed when the I2C kernel
merging guy disappeared... :(
Hi!
> Sometime back, I had put the sensors support in the 2.4.17 SMP kernel. It
> did not give me any problems and we have been using it successfully. The
> following are some of the details:
There's port to 2.5.49 available from lm_sensors website... Seems to
work okay.
Pavel
--
Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net.
What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email?