Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 21:43:47 -0400 From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@FreeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Cc: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net>, Shteryana Shopova <syrinx@FreeBSD.org>, Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org>, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Porting OpenBSD's sysctl hw.sensors framework to FreeBSD (was: Re: PERFORCE change 123040 for review) Message-ID: <46904153.7040909@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <468F517D.3010709@freebsd.org> References: <200707062345.l66Njpx3091970@repoman.freebsd.org> <468ED66E.5080400@fnop.net> <468F517D.3010709@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/07/2007 04:40, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Rui Paulo wrote: > >> Constantine A. Murenin wrote: >> >>> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=123040 >>> >>> Change 123040 by cnst@dale on 2007/07/06 23:45:36 >>> >>> add new node to sysctl.h: HW_SENSORS / "hw.sensors" >> >> >> Hmm. I thought new sysctl nodes or leafs were dynamic and you needn't to >> add any entry to sysctl.h. > > > Yes, all new sysctl nodes and leaves should be entirely dynamic. > The (old) static ones should go away with 8.0 or so. IIRC there > hasn't been any new static sysctl node since a loooong time. I don't exactly consider April 2007 being a loooong time ago. ;) So even first- and second-level nodes must be generated dynamically by 8.0? Hardware sensors tree is going to be pretty deep down. Under sysctl(8) the variable names will look like this: hw.sensors.lm0.temp0 whereas in reality, the tree has five levels: hw.sensors.lm0.temp.0 but as an exception to sysctl rule -- specifically for hw.sensors -- in OpenBSD the last dot is ommitted from sysctl(8) presentation to the user, to improve readability and preserve some sanity. :) I want to keep FreeBSD's sysctl hw.sensors tree compatible with the one in OpenBSD, so that both sysctl(8) shell scripts and sysctl(3) C utilities will be portable between the systems. Any suggestions are welcome, and let me know if you have any questions about the framework itself -- I'm the principal author of the current "two-level" revision of the framework on OpenBSD, so I know everything that is immediately relevant on how it works. ;) P.S. Obviously, what I say here about sysctl(8) variable names will equally apply to FreeBSD's sysctlbyname(3). P.P.S. Here is a sample output of a recent sysctl(8) on OpenBSD 4.1-current, on a consumer-grade G965-based Core 2 Duo system, with a pretty standard Winbond W83627DHG Super I/O: dale: {3360} dmesg | fgrep -e "cpu0: Intel" -e lm | tail -n2 cpu0: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 4300 @ 1.80GHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class) 1.81 GHz lm0 at isa0 port 0x290/8: W83627DHG dale: {3361} sysctl hw.sensors.{cpu0,lm0.{temp,fan,volt{0,1,2,7}}} hw.sensors.cpu0.temp0=28.00 degC hw.sensors.lm0.temp0=58.00 degC hw.sensors.lm0.temp1=24.00 degC hw.sensors.lm0.fan1=917 RPM hw.sensors.lm0.volt0=1.15 VDC (VCore) hw.sensors.lm0.volt1=12.30 VDC (+12V) hw.sensors.lm0.volt2=3.33 VDC (+3.3V) hw.sensors.lm0.volt7=3.31 VDC (3.3VSB) dale: {3362} And let me warn you that the framework supports many more things than just temperature sensors -- from raid drive status to NMEA time offsets! :) Cheers, Constantine, Google Summer of Code 2007 Student.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46904153.7040909>