On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 22:57:56 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > The chips supported by the max16065 driver should not be accessed using direct > i2ctools commands. Add warning to driver documentation to alert users. > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > RFC: Do we want this kind of warning in driver documentation ? Sure, this can't hurt. Maybe we could add a section in i2c-tools' documentation as well, listing the dangerous chips, starting with this one? i2cdetect already has a note about the AT24RF08 for historical reasons, I wouldn't mind documenting the "dangerous" chips more prominently. Hopefully the list will stay short. > > Documentation/hwmon/max16065 | 7 +++++++ > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/max16065 b/Documentation/hwmon/max16065 > index 44b4f61..c11f64a 100644 > --- a/Documentation/hwmon/max16065 > +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/max16065 > @@ -62,6 +62,13 @@ can be safely used to identify the chip. You will have to instantiate > the devices explicitly. Please see Documentation/i2c/instantiating-devices for > details. > > +WARNING: Do not access chip registers using the i2cdump command, and do not use > +any of the i2ctools commands on a command register (0xa5 to 0xac). The chips > +supported by this driver interpret any access to a command register (including > +read commands) as request to execute the command in question. This may result in > +power loss, board resets, and/or Flash corruption. Worst case, your board may > +turn into a brick. > + > > Sysfs entries > ------------- Acked-by: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
