From vda@ilport.com.ua Wed Jun 22 00:36:17 2005 From: Denis Vlasenko To: Greg K-H , Greg KH Subject: I2C: Coding style cleanups to via686a Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:25:13 +0300 Message-Id: <200506221025.13647.vda@ilport.com.ua> On Wednesday 22 June 2005 08:17, Greg KH wrote: > [PATCH] I2C: Coding style cleanups to via686a > > The via686a hardware monitoring driver has infamous coding style at the > moment. I'd like to clean up the mess before I start working on other > changes to this driver. Is the following patch acceptable? No code > change, only coding style (indentation, alignments, trailing white > space, a few parentheses and a typo). > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman Nice. You missed some. This one is on top of your patch: Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/i2c/chips/via686a.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) --- gregkh-2.6.orig/drivers/i2c/chips/via686a.c 2005-06-29 07:55:18.000000000 -0700 +++ gregkh-2.6/drivers/i2c/chips/via686a.c 2005-07-01 14:43:51.000000000 -0700 @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ /* via686a.c - Part of lm_sensors, Linux kernel modules - for hardware monitoring + for hardware monitoring Copyright (c) 1998 - 2002 Frodo Looijaard , - Kyösti Mälkki , + Kyösti Mälkki , Mark Studebaker , and Bob Dougherty (Some conversion-factor data were contributed by Jonathan Teh Soon Yew @@ -171,18 +171,18 @@ /******** TEMP CONVERSIONS (Bob Dougherty) *********/ /* linear fits from HWMon.cpp (Copyright 1998-2000 Jonathan Teh Soon Yew) if(temp<169) - return double(temp)*0.427-32.08; + return double(temp)*0.427-32.08; else if(temp>=169 && temp<=202) - return double(temp)*0.582-58.16; + return double(temp)*0.582-58.16; else - return double(temp)*0.924-127.33; + return double(temp)*0.924-127.33; A fifth-order polynomial fits the unofficial data (provided by Alex van Kaam ) a bit better. It also give more reasonable numbers on my machine (ie. they agree with what my BIOS tells me). Here's the fifth-order fit to the 8-bit data: temp = 1.625093e-10*val^5 - 1.001632e-07*val^4 + 2.457653e-05*val^3 - - 2.967619e-03*val^2 + 2.175144e-01*val - 7.090067e+0. + 2.967619e-03*val^2 + 2.175144e-01*val - 7.090067e+0. (2000-10-25- RFD: thanks to Uwe Andersen for finding my typos in this formula!)