On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Axel Thimm <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 01:08:15PM -0500, Brian Long wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Axel Thimm <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 09:25:31AM -0500, Brian Long wrote: >> >> Since Atrpms offers updated video4linux and other kmdls, would it make >> >> sense to offer an updated coretemp kmdl which supported the Atom CPUs? >> >> It would be nice to be able to monitor my F11 Atom-based CPU using >> >> lm_sensors, but the 2.6.30 kernel does not support it. I found the >> >> following patch: >> >> http://mabene.icomedias.com/coretemp.patch >> >> >> >> I'm not sure if 2.6.31 or 2.6.32 integrated this patch or something >> >> similar, but I'm thinking about taking the latest coretemp source and >> >> compiling it as a module for F11 or F12. Has anyone else considered >> >> something similar? >> > >> > this looks like a nice packaging project! >> > >> > You should use the compiler etc. as given by the Makefile under >> > %{kmdl_kernelsrcdir}. Or you could copy the Makefile/Kbuild parts from >> > the kernel tree. >> Axel, >> Do you have a recommended kmdl src.rpm I should look at for updating >> coretemp and possibly other hwmon modules (i.e. lm90)? I've looked at >> the video4linux and nvidia-graphics190.53 src.rpms. It appears the >> video4linux does roughly what I want, so I believe I'll play with its >> spec file. > > Yes, and you probably just need something like > > %build > %kmdl_config > %if %{kmdl_userland} > %else > make -C %{kmdl_kernelsrcdir} SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules > %endif > > %install > rm -rf %{buildroot} > mkdir %{buildroot} > %if %{kmdl_userland} > %else > make -C %{kmdl_kernelsrcdir} SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install \ > INSTALL_MOD_PATH=%{buildroot} INSTALL_MOD_DIR=updates/where/it/should/go > DESTDIR=%{buildroot} > if [ -d %{buildroot}%{kmdl_moduledir}/../extra ]; then > mv %{buildroot}%{kmdl_moduledir}/../extra/* > %{buildroot}%{kmdl_moduledir}/where/it/should/go > fi > > %endif
The above worked, but some of the modules in the drivers/hwmon from 2.6.32.8 will not build on 2.6.31.12 from F12. I've not tried on F11 2.6.30.x yet. I've written a Makefile.patch to fix the compile-time issues and get as many modules as possible to build. Should I just concentrate the new kmdl on containing those modules specific for the Intel Atom or should I include as many kmods as will build? hwmon, coretemp, lm90 are the primary modules I'm interested in for Intel Atom support, but I could include the rest of the modules that also build. What should the RPM be called? hwmon and hwmon-kmdl? For a snapshot name I was using 2_6_32_8 temporarily. Is there a proper way to denote that I'm building hwmon drivers from a newer kernel release? Thanks. /Brian/ _______________________________________________ atrpms-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-devel
