On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:38:11PM +0200, Eugene Butusov wrote:
> Jeremy Chadwick pisze:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>>> I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like
>>> they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitorin
Jeremy Chadwick pisze:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like
they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitoring. I
might have to look at lm-sensors from Linux, but that code is very
d
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like
> they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitoring. I
> might have to look at lm-sensors from Linux, but that code is very
> difficult to follow
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:52AM +0200, Eugene Butusov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a way to make use of hardware monitoring on Intel 945GCLF
> (with Atom 230 cpu)?
> It is relatively new child of Intel, but maybe someone figured it out
> yet.
>
> pciconf -lv shows this:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTE
Hi,
Is there a way to make use of hardware monitoring on Intel 945GCLF
(with Atom 230 cpu)?
It is relatively new child of Intel, but maybe someone figured it
out yet.
pciconf -lv shows this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:31:3:class=0x0c0500 card=0x464c8086 chip=0x27da8086
rev=0x01 hdr=0x00
