Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Rudolf, > > On 2005-11-01, Rudolf Marek wrote: > >>VID "something special" >>1 1 1 1 1.30V >>1 1 1 0 1.35V >>0 0 0 0 2.05V > > > This looks like standard VRM 8.4 to me, nothing special. OK, it seems it is not used. Newer datasheets are not talking about this. > Sure, add new VRM-like values if needed. We might end up defining > constant for these so that the number do not look like magic. Yes it would be better. > > While you're at it, I think we should do some changes to vid_from_reg: I > think VRM 8.2 was the default for historical reasons, but it's not > safe. We shouldn't have no default. 8.2 should be handled explicitely > as other values are. Any non-zero, non-handled value should trigger a > debug log message. Any non-handled value should result in 0 being > returned. OK? Sounds good. Regards Rudolf
