Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757957Ab3JNX1h (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:27:37 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48]:42867 "EHLO mail-la0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757913Ab3JNX1f (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:27:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20131014232239.GA29716@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1381236524-19633-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1381421199.4248.2.camel@x230.lan> <20131013151729.GA4028@srcf.ucam.org> <20131014155254.GB20187@srcf.ucam.org> <20131014232239.GA29716@srcf.ucam.org> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:27:33 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform: x86: asus-wmi: add fan control From: Felipe Contreras To: Matthew Garrett Cc: "corentin.chary@gmail.com" , "acpi4asus-user@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1569 Lines: 36 On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 06:18:36PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> > It wouldn't be appropriate to alter the firmware behaviour by default, >> > but yeah, that's the kind of thing that the thermal framework exists to >> > do. >> >> Well, how do I do that? The driver is up and running, and I can >> manually set different fan speeds, however nothing seems to happen >> automatically when the temperature increases. > > The easiest is to just do it from userspace. I think Intel have some > code for doing this, but I haven't looked at the thermal code for years. That defeats the purpose of the whole thermal binding infrastructure. >> > I don't think you can easily register multiple drivers for the same WMI >> > device. >> >> I don't mean this one, I mean the standalone one. Actually, the first >> one I sent doesn't require all this system memory stuff. > > Banging EC registers directly is the wrong thing to do. Going via WMI is > correct. I'm not going to bother arguing against your absolutist rhetoric. The fact is one patch can be applied, the other can't. Besides, nobody said anything about banging EC registers directly. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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/