Juerg Haefliger wrote: > All, > > I looked through a lot of SMSC datasheets the last couple of days with > the goal to improve sensor-detect to correctly identify more SMSC > Super I/Os. I noticed that some of the chips don't conform to the ISA > PNP standard with the device ID register living at a different address > (0x0d instead of 0x20). In order to correctly identify those chips, a > somewhat ugly (and totally SMSC specific) hack would be necessary. > Something like reading from both addresses and then using the value > from 0x0d for some of the SMSC chips. > > I wonder how much value this adds given that none of these Super IOs > have HW monitoring capabilities? The only benefit I can see is that > the chip is correctly identified and we can flag it as not being a > sensor and thus users won't bug us for adding support. > > Any thoughts, comments, ideas? > I think that if the hack isn't too gross, it would be good to also be able to identify those chips. Regards, Hans
