Re: [PATCH v4] i8k: Autodetect maximal fan speed and fan RPM multiplier

[Pali RohÃr]

On Sunday 21 December 2014 19:51:19 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/21/2014 10:40 AM, Pali RohÃr wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 December 2014 19:27:34 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> On 12/21/2014 09:23 AM, Pali RohÃr wrote:
> >>> This patch adds new function i8k_get_fan_nominal_speed()
> >>> for doing SMM call which will return nominal fan RPM for
> >>> specified fan speed. It returns nominal RPM value at
> >>> which fan operate when speed (0, 1, 2, 3) is set. It
> >>> looks like RPM value is not accurate, but still provides
> >>> very useful information.
> >>> 
> >>> First it can be used to validate if certain fan speed
> >>> could be accepted by SMM for setting fan speed and we can
> >>> use this routine to detect maximal fan speed.
> >>> 
> >>> Second it returns RPM value, so we can check if value
> >>> looks correct with multiplier 30 or multiplier 1 (until
> >>> now only these two multiplier were used). If RPM value
> >>> with multiplier 30 is too high, then multiplier 1 is
> >>> used.
> >>> 
> >>> In case when SMM reports that new function is not
> >>> supported we will fallback to old hardcoded values.
> >>> Maximal fan speed would be 2 and RPM multiplier 30.
> >>> 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pali RohÃr <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Tested-by: Pali RohÃr <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> 
> >> Tested-by the submitter is kind of implied.
> >> 
> >> Anyway, this patch does not apply to 3.19-rc1, nor to 3.18.
> >> What is your baseline ? Can you rebase to 3.19-rc1 ?
> >> Or do I need to apply some other patch first ?
> >> 
> >> Thanks,
> >> Guenter
> > 
> > You need to apply these old patches:
> > i8k: Add support for temperature sensor labels
> > i8k: Register only temperature sensors which have labels
> > i8k: Return -ENODATA for invalid temperature
> > i8k: Rework error retries
> 
> I think it would make sense to re-send the entire series at
> this point (including my patch and all Reviewed-by: tags).
> Problem is that not all patches have a version number (for
> example there are multiple versions of the label patch, but
> the version I reviewed does not have version information).
> This makes it very difficult to find the correct (reviewed)
> version, and I suspect that Greg may neither have the time
> nor the desire to do it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Guenter

Ok, I sent all patches which was not merged to char-misc tree yet

-- 
Pali RohÃr
pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.