Hi Darrick, On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:47:30 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > I am confused. According to my notes, the MAX6648/MAX6692 is the same > > chip as the MAX6646/MAX6647/MAX6649 (same chip ID of 0x59), the only > > difference being the I2C address (0x4c for the MAX6646, 0x4e for the > > MAX6647 and 0x4d for the MAX6648/MAX6649/MAX6692). So the current code > > should _already_ detect your MAX6648 or MAX6692 as kind = max6646. > > Heh, yep, it does. I guess this patch has been sitting around long > enough to become obsolete, sorry for the unnecessary mail traffic. I > guess we can drop this one. Well, confusion probably would have been avoided if it had been properly documented that the MAX6648 and MAX6692 were already supported. So I think we should still apply the Kconfig part of your patch. Documentation/hwmon/lm90 would need a small update as well. Could you please send an updated patch doing this? I would be happy to apply that. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare
