* Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> [2003-07-31 09:20:16 +0200]: > > > > I will do the changes on our driver tomorrow, test, commit, let you > > > test, and then submit a patch for 2.6. > > > > Oops... I thought you already committed this. So I haven't actually > > tested it yet - but you probably knew that. If you pass a patch to > > the list first I'll give it a go. > > My fault, I tested it yesterday but had to go before I could commit it. > Now this is done. > > It works OK for me (as99127f, w83781d, w83782d). > > Could you (and everyone who can) test the changes? I'd like to ensure it > doesn't break anything. I suggest we wait some times before submitting > the changes for inclusion into the 2.6 kernel (it is in no way a > critical fix). It works OK on ASB100 Bach as well. > > > 1* Leave everything unchanged. > > > 2* Limit AS199237F and ASB100 to addres 0x2d. > > > 3* Leave the whole 0x28-0x2f range possible but give the chips a > > > lower confidence if address isn't 0x2d. > > > > > > I'm in favor of solution 3. > > > > I wouldn't mind limiting ASB100 to 0x2d, actually. I don't recall > > ever seeing it anywhere else - but if it is, we'll find out soon > > enough. ;) Or choice 3 is fine too. > > We can have slightly different strategies in sensors-detect and the > drivers themselves. I will apply solution 3 to sensors-detect. Feel free > to accept only address 0x2d for your Bach-only driver. OK, I'll probably do that. Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman at lightlink.com
