On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:20:08 +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 05:40:47PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > We can probably go even further. The w83627ehf driver says that 0x885x > > corresponds to the W83627EHF and 0x886x corresponds to the W83627EHG. > > While the datasheet doesn't mention anything like this, it seems to be > > correct on all chips I (and others) have checked. For example my > > W83627EHG has ID 0x8868. > > > > So we could have 2 entries in sensors-detect, one for the W83627EHF/EF > > and one for the W83627EHG/EG. It would be more precise, and it also has > > the advantage that the mask(s) would be narrower. What do you think? > > Yeah, why not. We cannot be 100% sure, but it sounds like a reasonable > assumption. But I'd add a comment in the script which says that this > is just an educated guess. OK. Can you please send a patch doing this? Thanks, -- Jean Delvare
