On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 07:21:10 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:14:03AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 13:38:36 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > + if ($chip == 14) {
> > > + return if ($conf & 0x2a) != 0;
> > > + return if $rate > 0x09;
> > > + return if $mid != 0xa1; # NXP Semiconductor/Philips
> > > + return 8 if $cid == 0x00; # SA56004
> >
> > A device ID of 0, unfortunately, is very fragile and thus certainly
> > doesn't deserve a confidence value of 8. 6, tops. It would also make
> > sense to check the unused bits in register 0xbf (Alert Mode / $conf2)
> > for this device, to make the detection somewhat more reliable, as we do
> > for many other LM90-compatible chips.
> >
> Ok, I'll change that. Guess we should make the same change in the driver.
I already have a patch doing that, I'm only waiting for the register
dump to test it. The driver didn't even test the configuration and rate
registers, I added that as well.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
