Jean Delvare wrote: >Hi Christophe, > > > >>30: 4d ff ff 64 64 64 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 27 41 6a >> >> > >Device revision 0x6A. ADM1027 is documented as 0x60+, ADT7463 is >documented as 0x62+, so I would indeed agree that it must be an ADT7463. >Our driver needs to be updated. > > Where do you see that in the datasheet? The way I read this datasheet: http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Data_Sheets/272624927ADT7463_c.pdf It says that the only valid values for the REVISION register are 0x62 and 0x6A. (see Table IV on page 32) It doesn't say that any value larger than 0x62 is an ADT7463. I think it might be safer to just add 0x6A as a valid ADT7463 chip. See the attached patch against CVS. >In the meantime you can use force_adt7463. > > -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: lm_sensors2-lm85.patch Url: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20050219/2249e993/attachment.pl
