On 5/31/24 18:28, Wolfram Sang wrote:
+/* Return 0 if detection is successful, -ENODEV otherwise */ +static int spd5118_detect(struct i2c_client *client, struct i2c_board_info *info) +{ + struct i2c_adapter *adapter = client->adapter; + int regval; + + if (!i2c_check_functionality(adapter, I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA | + I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WORD_DATA)) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_word_swapped(client, SPD5118_REG_TYPE); + if (regval != 0x5118) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_word_data(client, SPD5118_REG_VENDOR); + if (regval < 0 || !spd5118_vendor_valid(regval & 0xff, regval >> 8)) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, SPD5118_REG_CAPABILITY); + if (regval < 0) + return -ENODEV; + if (!(regval & SPD5118_CAP_TS_SUPPORT) || (regval & 0xfc)) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, SPD5118_REG_TEMP_CLR); + if (regval) + return -ENODEV; + regval = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, SPD5118_REG_ERROR_CLR); + if (regval) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, SPD5118_REG_REVISION); + if (regval < 0 || (regval & 0xc1)) + return -ENODEV; + + regval = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, SPD5118_REG_TEMP_CONFIG); + if (regval < 0) + return -ENODEV; + if (regval & ~SPD5118_TS_DISABLE) + return -ENODEV; + + strscpy(info->type, "spd5118", I2C_NAME_SIZE); + return 0; +}What about adding DDR5 to i2c_register_spd() and dropping this function?
Yes, that should be the next step. I didn't want to do that here because it would introduce a cross-subsystem dependency. Of course, that depends a bit on your position about such dependencies. If I do that as part of this series, would you Ack it, or would you want to handle that through the i2c tree ? Guenter
