please rerun with the correct arguments 'isadump 0x295 0x296' I can look at boosting the confidence for the it8712 detection from 7 to 8 so it will be recommended over the lm78. mds Jakub Narebski wrote: > > Here comes the output of isadump output (which was missing in previous > e-mail) > > [root at localhost root]# isadump -f 0 > [...] > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f > 00: e4 38 43 fd 00 ff b6 e0 80 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 10: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 20: 80 f8 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 30: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 40: 80 0e 98 b4 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 50: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 60: 9c 3c ff ff 14 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 70: 00 36 00 00 00 36 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > 80: 94 26 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 90: ff ff 02 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > a0: 00 27 ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 ff ff ff ff ff ff > b0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > c0: a8 64 b7 f8 a2 f9 10 23 54 20 a5 6d 7b a8 a0 b8 > d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > e0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > f0: 00 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff > > P.S. I don't know what I have changed, but now the sensors-detect detect > properly ITE IT8712F sensors chip (and also misdetect it as LM78 chip). > The only error is that sensors-detect claims that one should use LM87 > (instead of looking on the motherboard or motherboard/chipset website for > the sensors chip used) even though both chips have _the same_ confidence. > It is also strange that the summary for LM78 and IT87 chips is > inconsistient: it differs in form. > > The shortened log follows: > > [root at localhost root]# modprobe i2c-viapro i2c-dev i2c-isa > [root at localhost root]# modprobe it87 ignore=0,0x2d temp_type=0x38 > [root at localhost root]# lsmod > Module Size Used by > it87 6704 0 (unused) > i2c-proc 6128 0 [it87] > i2c-dev 3616 0 (unused) > i2c-isa 1152 0 (unused) > i2c-viapro 3648 0 (unused) > i2c-core 13248 0 [it87 i2c-proc i2c-dev i2c-isa i2c-viapro] > [...] > [root at localhost root]# sensors -s > [root at localhost root]# sensors-detect > [...] > Next adapter: SMBus Via Pro adapter at 5000 (Non-I2C SMBus adapter) > Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively): > Client found at address 0x2d > Probing for 'National Semiconductor LM78'... Success! > (confidence 7, driver 'lm78') > Probing for 'ITE IT8705F / IT8712F / SiS 950'... Success! > (confidence 7, driver 'it87') > Client found at address 0x50 > Probing for 'Serial EEPROM (PC-100 DIMM)'... Success! > (confidence 8, driver 'eeprom') > Client found at address 0x69 > > Some chips are also accessible through the ISA bus. ISA probes are > typically a bit more dangerous, as we have to write to I/O ports to do > this. Do you want to scan the ISA bus? (YES/no): > Probing for 'National Semiconductor LM78' > Trying address 0x0290... Success! > (confidence 7, driver 'lm78') > Alias of the chip on I2C bus 'SMBus Via Pro adapter at 5000', address 0x002d > Probing for 'ITE IT8705F / IT8712F / SiS 950' > Trying address 0x0290... Success! > (confidence 7, driver 'it87') > > Now follows a summary of the probes I have just done. > Just press ENTER to continue: > > Driver `lm78' (should be inserted): > Detects correctly: > * Bus `SMBus Via Pro adapter at 5000' (Non-I2C SMBus adapter) > Busdriver `i2c-viapro', I2C address 0x2d > ISA bus address 0x0290 (Busdriver `i2c-isa') > Chip `National Semiconductor LM78' (confidence: 7) > > Driver `it87' (may not be inserted): > Misdetects: > * Bus `SMBus Via Pro adapter at 5000' (Non-I2C SMBus adapter) > Busdriver `i2c-viapro', I2C address 0x2d > Chip `ITE IT8705F / IT8712F / SiS 950' (confidence: 7) > * ISA bus address 0x0290 (Busdriver `i2c-isa') > Chip `ITE IT8705F / IT8712F / SiS 950' (confidence: 7) > > Driver `eeprom' (should be inserted): > Detects correctly: > * Bus `SMBus Via Pro adapter at 5000' (Non-I2C SMBus adapter) > Busdriver `i2c-viapro', I2C address 0x50 > Chip `Serial EEPROM (PC-100 DIMM)' (confidence: 8) > > -- > Jakub Nar?bski > Poland
