RFC: complete rewrite of i2c-i801 for 2.6.x

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Mark,

I don't think that there are any changes to the ICH7 SMBus Controller,
other then DID, which is 27DAh.  The Datasheet will not be available
until the product launches.  I will however, patch the driver with the
new DID, test it out and then submit the patch here and to the LKML.  My
plan is to do this within the next six weeks or so.  Unless you can or
want to add the DID now?

Let me know if you would still like me to try something out on ICH5,
ICH6 or ESB6300.

Thanks,

Jason Gaston



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Studebaker [mailto:mds4 at verizon.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 9:37 AM
To: Gaston, Jason D
Cc: LM Sensors
Subject: Re: RFC: complete rewrite of i2c-i801 for 2.6.x

thanks for offer. i2c block read support for ich5 and later is now in
CVS.
Best way to test bus drivers is with 'i2cdump'.
In particular to test i2c block reads, best way is with the "i" mode of
i2cdump.
If it works, regular byte ("b") mode and "i" mode should have identical
results
when reading from an eeprom.

For the ICH7, first we've heard of it, but not surprised it would be the
chip
after ICH6 :)
I see there's nothing on developer.intel.com about it. Will there be any
changes in the SMBus controller? What is the device ID? Datasheet
availability?
Whether you submit 2.4 or 2.6 patches doesn't really matter.
But with the device ID, and assurances that the SMBus part of the chip
didn't change,
it's real easy.

mds


Gaston, Jason D wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> I would be willing to do some testing of the i2c-i801 driver on ICH5,
> ICH6, ESB6300 and ICH7.  I have access to boards/systems, but I am not
> proficient in i2c testing, other then running "sensors" and seeing the
> data.  If you know of some instructions for the testing you are
looking
> for, I am willing to give it a go.
> 
> In addition, I will soon want to get support for ICH7 added to the
> i2c-i801 driver.  Last time, when I wanted to get support for ICH6
> added, I posted a patch, adding the DID's, to the LKML and Greg KH.
> This made it into the 2.6 kernel.  Perhaps I should get support added
> here first and then the base kernel?
> 
> Let me know how I can help,
> 
> Jason Gaston
> Jason.d.gaston at intel.com
> 
> 
>     
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Studebaker [mailto:mds4 at verizon.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:02 PM
> To: Sensors
> Subject: Re: RFC: complete rewrite of i2c-i801 for 2.6.x
> 
> 
> 
> Mark M. Hoffman wrote:
> 
>>Hi Mark:
>>
>>(CCs trimmed)
>>
>>* Mark D. Studebaker <mds4 at verizon.net> [2004-12-07 11:20:54 -0500]:
>>
>>
>>>My reading of the DB datasheet (in 2002 and now) is that it doesn't
> 
> support a
> 
>>>standard i2c block read. The driver functionality bitmask reflects
> 
> that.
> 
>>>I fixed the error message (which would only print out if a driver
> 
> ignored 
> 
>>>the functionality mask).
>>
>>
>>Interesting.  It looks like that datasheet only shows this:
>>
>>	S Addr Wr [A] Comm [A] D0 [A] D1 [A] S (read bytes...)
>>
>>I agree that's not like any transaction we support.
> 
> 
> correct. don't know what they were thinking.
> 
> 
>>OTOH, the ICH5 [1] datasheet shows this:
>>
>>	S Addr Wr [A] D1 [A] S (read bytes...)
>>
>>That's exactly the transfer protocol that eeproms need, right?
> 
> (That's why I
> 
>>mentioned to Khali by IRC last weekend that I thought it should be
> 
> possible.)
> 
> 
> I think it is what eeproms need (you omitted 'Addr' after the second
> 'S').
> It matches what I wrote in doc/smbus-protocol in i2c
> (that is, the i2c block functions are defined to take a 'command'
byte,
> matching
>  what eeproms need for 'random' reads and writes).
> 
> Does anybody have a ICH5/6? If so I can add support to the driver for
> testing.
> 
> mds
> 
> 
> 
>>It would be really bizarre if these two chipsets behaved differently
> 
> in this
> 
>>respect - I wonder if the datasheets are correct?
>>
>>[1] Well I just scanned all the other datasheets... only ICH5, ICH6,
> 
> and
> 
>>6300ESB appear to support the standard I2C block read.  Sorry Khali.
> 
> :)
> 
>>Regards,
>>
> 
> 
> 




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Hardware Monitoring]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]

  Powered by Linux