Le Sunday 03 August 2014 à 18:36 +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli a écrit :
> On 08/03/2014 05:52 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 17:12:57 +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> >> On 08/03/2014 04:12 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> >>>> + (verbose > 0 && level >= 0)) {
> >>>> + print_temp("CPU-temp: ", temp );
> >>>> + if (casetemp)
> >>>> + print_temp(", Case: ", casetemp );
> >>>> + if (level >= 0)
> >>>> + printk(", Fan: %d (tuned %+d)\n", 11-level,
> >>>> + x.fan_level-level );
> >>>> + else
> >>>> + printk(", Fan: %d (tuned +0)\n",x.fan_level);
> >>>
> >>> I think you can do without the "tuned +0" which doesn't add much value.
> >>
> >> Me too. But the old driver does the same, so I preferred to
> >> leave it as is.
> >
> > I looked at the code again and no, I can't see the old code doing that.
> > It has "tuned %+d" only in tune_fan() which is only called if
> > level >= 0. The other printk (when tune_fan isn't called) doesn't have
> > a "tuned" part.
>
> This is taken from an old log of a v3.2 kernel (no changes here):
>
> [ 886.510879] CPU-temp: 55.4 C, Case: 33.1 C, Fan: 0 (tuned -11)
> [ 910.522869] CPU-temp: 56.0 C, Case: 33.5 C, Fan: 0 (tuned +0)
> [ 958.546880] CPU-temp: 57.0 C, Case: 34.1 C, Fan: 3 (tuned +3)
>
> in the code if level <0, then there is no update in the log. But if
> level >0 and level is equal to the previous one, this leads to
> have "tuned +0"...
I agree with that.
> But I have to be honest: I have not fully understand how
> "level" is computed.
I agree with that too :/
> The printk without "(tuned %+d)" is never called because
> LOG_TEMP was #define(d) equal to 0.
And this is what your second printk is replacing. So it should not have
the "(tuned *)" either.
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
