On 01/17/11 14:36, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 14:04 -0500, Anish Patel wrote:
On 01/17/11 13:09, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:14:02AM -0500, Anish Patel wrote:
patch attached.
*** sensors-detect Fri Jan 14 11:11:56 2011
--- sensors-detect-new Sat Jan 15 03:01:01 2011
***************
*** 1205,1210 ****
--- 1205,1215 ----
i2c_addrs => [0x18, 0x2a, 0x4c, 0x4d],
i2c_detect => sub { emc1403_detect(@_, 3); },
}, {
+ name => "SMSC_EMC1023",
+ driver => "emc1023",
+ i2c_addrs => [0x48,0x49,0x4c,0x4d],
+ i2c_detect => sub { emc1023_detect(@_); },
+ }, {
name => "ST STTS424",
driver => "jc42",
i2c_addrs => [0x18..0x1f],
***************
*** 5387,5392 ****
--- 5392,5418 ----
return 6;
}
+ # Chip to detect:
+ # Registers used:
+ # 0xed: Device ID register
+ # 0xfe: Vendor ID register
+ # 0xff: Revision register
+ sub emc1023_detect
+ {
+ my ($file, $addr, $chip) = @_;
You don't pass $chip as argument, so you should not extract it either.
fixed
+ my $dev_id = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data($file, 0xed);
+ my $man_id = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data($file, 0xfe);
+ my $rev = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data($file, 0xff);
+
+ return unless $man_id == 0x5d; # SMSC
+
+ return unless ($dev_id == 0x0c) || ($dev_id == 0x0d) || ($dev_id == 0x08) || ($dev_id == 0x09) ;
Per emc1023 datasheet, Product ID values should be 0x04 .. 0x07. Am I missing something ?
Also, the Product ID and the chip address should match. So you could enhance detection
by checking for the match.
i don't this this can happen, if you look at pg 2 of the data sheet, you
can see where they hard code the addresses for the part.
when you read out of ED, it seems to have stored the lower 4bits of the
address as the product ID. this is all i can say for the 5 boards i
have here with the emc1023-1 and emc1023-2.
Page 11 says:
Read address Register Name Default Value (hex)
ED Product ID 04 (-01)
05 (-02)
06 (-03)
07 (-04)
and on page 2:
EMC1023-1-ACZL-TR (Address - 1001100b)
EMC1023-2-ACZL-TR (Address - 1001101b)
EMC1023-3-ACZL-TR (Address - 1001000b)
EMC1023-4-ACZL-TR (Address - 1001001b)
So, as example, one should assume that EMC1023-1 should always be on
address 0x4c, and that reading register 0xed should return 0x04. I don't
see where it says that reading register 0xed should ever return the
lower 4 bits of the chip address.
yes, that is what one would assume, but thats not whats happening, and
you are correct, the DS does not say that reading register 0xed should
return the lower 4bits of the chip address, but that is what i am seeing
while working on the system that has the EMC1023-1 and EMC1023-2.
Looking up other chips, I found the following product IDs for various
EMCxxxx chips using register 0xed as Product ID register.
Chip Register 0xed
emc1043 0x0c .. 0x0f, 0x2c
emc1053 0x3c .. 0x3f
emc1063 0x30 .. 0x33
So I wonder if you might really have emc1043 on your board instead of
emc1023. Would that be possible ?
its possible, but i just found a spare CPU carrier card and looked at
it. the IC is def a 1023.
I guess it is possible that i have fake/rebadged 1023.
Guenter
Anish
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
