* Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> [2003-07-26 11:26:57 +0200]: > > I made significant changes to the w83781d family detection method in > sensors-detect. > > * Separate detection sub for W83L784R/AR. Its registers differ from the > other chipsets in the family, it shouldn't have been added to > w83781d_detect in the first place. > * Ranges limited to what the specs say for I2C-only chips (see below). > * Add detection for the AS99127F rev.2 and explicit detection of the > ASB100 Bach. Nice. I tested this against Bach just now. Timely too, since I'm doing an independent driver for that chip. Anyone have a preference for the name? If not it will be "bach.c". > * Improve code readability. > * Do not ignore the chipset ID LSB anymore. Explicit acceptation of 0x11 > as a W83781D ID instead. > * Fix a bug in secondary LM75 address extraction. The previous code > returned 0x48 whatever the register could contain. I'm astonished it was > never reported. This means that most if not all chipsets in that family > use 0x48 as their secondary LM75's address. > > Similar changes should be made to the w83781d driver itself, but I would > like my changes to be tested before that. My tests were successful on > three chips I own (AS99127F rev.1, W83781D and W83782D) but more tests > would be welcome. Seems to work on Bach. Will you do a patch for 2.6? Otherwise I can. > About the address ranges: > > For the W83783S and the W83L784R/AR, no address selection pins exist. > Since they cab be accessed only via the I2C bus, this make me think the > address is unlikely to be changed, so I limited the range to the default > address (0x2D). Likewise, the W83791D has 2 address selector pins, so > the range is 0x2C-0x2F (4 addresses). > For Asus chip, I chose the range 0x28-0x2F. We have no datasheet, this > seem to be a good compromise (and Alex does the same). However, the fact > that the register 0x48 doesn't hold the chip I2C address make me think > Asus doesn't want the address to be changed at all, so we could limit > the address to 0x2d. (MMH, do you confirm that your ASB100 has nothing > useful at 0x48?) AFAIK, Bach is I2C only. Mine reads 0 from 0x48. > I think it's better to limit the ranges. This reduces scan time (not > significantly I guess) and limits the risks of misdetection and > corruptions. I browsed the mailing list and every log I could find fits > the new ranges. I voluntarily left the ISA chips ranges unchanged, since > in this case the address can be changed using the ISA bus and we have > reports it occured (W83627HF have been seen at 0x2c and 0x2f according > to what I read in our archives). Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman at lightlink.com
