Hi Jean, On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 04:36:31AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Fri, 27 May 2011 21:51:13 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > The attached patch (on top of Per's most recent patch) works quite nicely. > > Per, maybe you can just merge it with your patch and resubmit it. > > Looks good, pretty much what I had in mind. But I think you could make > the code even more compact: > > /* sanity check */ > if (i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, 0x04) != 0x4D > || i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, 0x06) != 0x4D > || i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, 0xff) != 0x4D) > return -ENODEV; > Yes, you are right. I didn't do it to avoid a checkpatch warning, but forgot that I don't use a variable anymore. Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
