reminder we need a patch for this from Philip - or are you waiting for verification from Reuben that the chip is on the board? ticket 1933 mds Philip Pokorny wrote: > Reuben Farrelly wrote: > >> Hi Philip, >> >> Philip Pokorny wrote: >> >>> Jean Delvare wrote: >>> >>>>> lm85 new stepping 0x69: ticket 1933 (khali) >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I AM NOT THE LM85 GUY! >>>> >>>> The driver was written and is maintained by Philip Pokorny and Justin >>>> Thiessen at Penguin Computing. >>>> >>>> #1933: [waiting for user data] >>>> >>>> >>> >>> So, I guess I *am* the LM85 guy. >>> >>> Yes, please send or reply with 'i2c-dump 0 0x2e' when lm85 is *not* >>> loaded. >> >> >> >> Here you go.. >> >> [root at typhoon ~]# i2cdump 0 0x2e >> No size specified (using byte-data access) >> WARNING! This program can confuse your I2C bus, cause data loss and >> worse! >> I will probe file /dev/i2c-0, address 0x2e, mode byte >> Continue? [Y/n] >> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f 0123456789abcdef >> 30: 4d 4d 4d 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 69 MMM...........?i > > > > So this says that it's a National Semiconductor part (0x3e is 0x01) and > that's it's *not* an LM85 (0x3f is 0x69) but according to the lm96000 > datasheet it is a superset of the lm85 functionality. Unfortunately, > the only value listed for 0x3f in the lm96000 datasheet is 0x68. > > So, most likely this is a later version of the lm96000. > >> >> Probing for `National Semiconductor LM85 or LM96000'... Success! >> (confidence 7, driver `lm85') > > > > That's helpful. Thanks Khali... > >> >> The chip is pretty hard to locate on the board but if it's really >> necessary I can try again :( > > > > You might check again. But instead of looking for a chip with "LM85", > look for a 24-pin surface mount package with "LM96???" on it. It will > be smaller than the keys on your keyboard, but larger than the tip of a > pen or pencil. > > I'll review the LM96000 datasheet and see if there is any additional > functionality we might want to add to the lm85 driver. > > :v) >
