Sorry for my late reply, >FWIW, I don't think there is anything to implement; I don't see any >differences in functionality. Yes, no functional difference but the detection >I am much more concerned about weakening the already weak detection even further: >As written, each chip with register 0x07 != 0xa1 will be identified as LM75B. >Even if that was strengthened to actually check if the register value is 0xff, >we have no idea what other vendors might implement in those registers. it would >most certainly mis-identify LM75C as LM75B. Not that it really matters if >the chip _is_ a LM75C, but who knows if other chips fit that identification >pattern. Yes, that's also my concern on the code of detection. I don't have any other sensors as LM75C to try, so thinking maybe some other guys can help extend it if needed in future. >Overall, my suggestion is to add a small startup script to affected systems >to instantiate the chip directly, and avoid weakening the detect function. Understood, we can have the instantiating script but just don't want limit the detection. Thanks!
