On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:59:43 +0200, Mike Gorchak wrote: > Hello, Jean! > > GR>>> never mind; no idea if G7811 ever really existed. I found version 1.3 > GR>>> of the datasheet which describes both G781 and G781-1. Can you test > GR>>> the driver and sensors-detect if I send you a pointer to the code ? > ??>> It seems that this patch is ok, except for one thing. > ??>> Let me explain what I did. I added support for ACPI SMBus connected to > ??>> Embedded Controller to the lm-sensors (for a netbook without proper > ??>> ACPI support). There are two G781 sensors connected to this bus, one > ??>> to the address 0x4C and one to the 0x4D. Both sensors have 0x01 as > ??>> device id. But patch assumes that only G781-1 can be connected to the > ??>> 0x4D address. > JD> If they followed a naming logic similar to National Semiconductor, G781 > JD> will have address 0x4C and G781-1 will have address 0x4D. They are > JD> basically the exact same chip except for the address, so the driver > JD> doesn't even need to know, other than the fact that both addresses 0x4C > JD> and 0x4D are possible. > > Now driver checks only for 0x03 device id at address 0x4D, which is not > correct. 0x01 device id can be present at 0x4D address too. That's all I'd > like to say :) Yes, yes, I agree and I'm sure Guenter does as well. Just give me a moment to review his two patches, and then wait for him to wake up, get dressed, have coffee or whatever, and resubmit ;) -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
