From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:13:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:13:47 -0500 Received: from [196.41.29.142] ([196.41.29.142]:36084 "EHLO workshop.saharact.lan") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:13:46 -0500 Subject: Re: lm sensors sysfs file structure From: Martin Schlemmer To: Greg KH Cc: Albert Cahalan , KML In-Reply-To: <20030327231027.GC1687@kroah.com> References: <1048806052.10675.4440.camel@cube> <20030327231027.GC1687@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1048836107.4776.2285.camel@workshop.saharact.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2- Date: 28 Mar 2003 09:21:48 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 01:10, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 06:00:51PM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > Greg KH writes: > > > > > temp_max[1-3] Temperature max value. > > > Fixed point value in form XXXXX and > > > should be divided by > > > 100 to get degrees Celsius. > > > Read/Write value. > > > > Celsius can go negative, which may be yucky > > and hard to test. Kelvin generally doesn't > > suffer this problem. (yeah, yeah, quantum stuff...) > > Wow, only 4 hours before someone mentioned Kelvin, I think I lost a bet > with someone :) > > Seriously, let the value go negative, no problem. As long as it isn't > floating point input which has to be parsed by the kernel. That's all I > care about. > Silly w83781d again. temp1 is a u8, and temp2 and temp3 is u16 (if they are supported on the specific model. Should we do any bounds checking on input via sysfs ? Regards, -- Martin Schlemmer