Hi Hans,
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:12:32 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> As discussed on IRC the Syleus does not like our way of seeing if a device is
> present at a certain address, this patch implements a workaround consisting of
> doing a byte data read instead of a quick command or a byte read.
>
> Once reviewed I can commit this myself.
> Index: prog/detect/sensors-detect
> ===================================================================
> --- prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 5642)
> +++ prog/detect/sensors-detect (working copy)
> @@ -2629,7 +2629,14 @@
> {
> my ($file, $addr, $funcs) = @_;
>
> - if (($addr >= 0x50 && $addr <= 0x5F)
> + if ($addr == 0x73) {
> + # Special case for FSC chips, as at least the Syleus locks
> + # up with our regular probe code. Note that to our current
> + # knowledge only FSC chips live on this address, and for them
> + # this probe method is safe
Missing final dot ;)
> + return 0 unless ($funcs & I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE);
Wrong test: you want to check for I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE_DATA.
> + return i2c_smbus_access($file, SMBUS_READ, 0, SMBUS_BYTE_DATA, []);
> + } elsif (($addr >= 0x50 && $addr <= 0x5F)
> || ($addr >= 0x30 && $addr <= 0x37)) {
> # This covers all EEPROMs we know of, including page protection
> # addresses. Note that some page protection addresses will not
Minor nitpicking: I'd also move the test after the EEPROM test, keeping
the tests in both numeric and historical order.
Other than that, no objection on the principle, I believe it's the
right thing to do.
--
Jean Delvare
