lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 21 Dec 2014 10:51:19 -0800
From:	Guenter Roeck <>
To:	Pali Rohár <>
CC:	Arnd Bergmann <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,,,
	Steven Honeyman <>,
	Jean Delvare <>,
	Gabriele Mazzotta <>,
	Jochen Eisinger <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] i8k: Autodetect maximal fan speed and fan RPM multiplier

On 12/21/2014 10:40 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Sunday 21 December 2014 19:27:34 Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 12/21/2014 09:23 AM, Pali Rohár 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 Rohár <>
>>> Tested-by: Pali Rohár <>
>> 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.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists