From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_Gerhart?= Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 23:24:58 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: (it87) Add support for IT8781F, IT8782F, IT8783E/F Message-Id: <1149E1C9-FD96-44BF-BB90-A10361356DA4@extracloud.de> List-Id: References: <1331180739-19470-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <1331180739-19470-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org Hi Jean, Am 23.03.2012 um 22:02 schrieb Jean Delvare: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:43:15 +0100, Bjoern Gerhart wrote: >> 2012/3/8 Guenter Roeck : >>> Assume all three are compatible and have the same functionality. >>>=20 >>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck >> Tested-by: Bjoern Gerhart >=20 > Care to share the output of "sensors" with us? >=20 Sure. To be more precise, I tested with an IT8783 chip configured and wired= by the hardware team at the company I'm working for on a proprietary mainb= oard. With the sensors.conf created therefore, the sensors output looks lik= e this: [root@localhost ~]# LANG=3DC sensors it8783-isa-0a10 Adapter: ISA adapter CPU Core: +1.15 V (min =3D +0.70 V, max =3D +1.70 V) +1.50V: +1.50 V (min =3D +1.10 V, max =3D +1.90 V) +3.30V: +3.38 V (min =3D +2.70 V, max =3D +4.00 V) +12.0V: +12.16 V (min =3D +10.69 V, max =3D +13.70 V) -12.0V: -11.95 V (min =3D -13.68 V, max =3D -10.30 V) +1.10V: +1.12 V (min =3D +0.90 V, max =3D +1.22 V) VBat: +3.09 V Fan1: 1662 RPM (min =3D 300 RPM) PSU: 1245 RPM (min =3D 500 RPM) Board T.: +30.0 C (low =3D +0.0 C, high =3D +55.0 C) sensor =3D ther= mal diode CPU T.: +47.0 C (low =3D +0.0 C, high =3D +63.0 C) sensor =3D ther= mal diode coretemp-isa-0000 Adapter: ISA adapter Core 0: +40.0 C (high =3D +86.0 C, crit =3D +100.0 C) Core 1: +43.0 C (high =3D +86.0 C, crit =3D +100.0 C) These are about the same values as the "Hardware Monitor" section at the BI= OS setup shows also. So all values look reasonable. In general, for future Tested-bys: does it make sense to append a kind of t= est report (like the above one) directly after the Tested-by statement, or = should it be located in a separate mail? Bj=F6rn _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors