Patch to fix PPR register initialization to set both channels
Signed-off-by: Chris D Schimp <silverchris <at> gmail.com>
---
diff -uprN -X a/Documentation/dontdiff a/drivers/hwmon/max6639.c
b/drivers/hwmon/max6639.c
--- a/drivers/hwmon/max6639.c 2012-02-06 12:47:00.000000000 -0500
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/max6639.c 2012-02-20 16:36:02.553668023 -0500
@@ -438,7 +438,6 @@ static int max6639_init_client(struct i2
MAX6639_GCONFIG_POR);
if (err)
goto exit;
-
/* Fans pulse per revolution is 2 by default */
if (max6639_info && max6639_info->ppr > 0 &&
max6639_info->ppr < 5)
@@ -446,11 +445,6 @@ static int max6639_init_client(struct i2
else
data->ppr = 2;
data->ppr -= 1;
- err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client,
- MAX6639_REG_FAN_PPR(i),
- data->ppr << 5);
- if (err)
- goto exit;
if (max6639_info)
rpm_range = rpm_range_to_reg(max6639_info->rpm_range);
@@ -458,6 +452,13 @@ static int max6639_init_client(struct i2
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
+ /* Set Fan pulse per revolution */
+ err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client,
+ MAX6639_REG_FAN_PPR(i),
+ data->ppr << 6);
+ if (err)
+ goto exit;
+
/* Fans config PWM, RPM */
err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client,
MAX6639_REG_FAN_CONFIG1(i),
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Roland Stigge <stigge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 02/20/2012 06:39 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> Please resubmit a (-p1) patch fixing the issue your originally spotted
>>> instead.
>>>
>> We really need input from Roland on the initialization problem.
>> Might make sense to kwwp him copied on this exchange.
>
> Thanks for your notification and sorry for the delay!
>
> Unfortunately, when I ported the driver from the other original author,
> I kept the initialization procedure which is obviously wrong, doing
> initialization only for one channel. (I adjusted the driver locally
> platform-dependent, so didn't find a chance for mainline integration and
> this way, the obvious problems in the mainline driver slipped.)
>
> Therefore, a fix for doing this for both channels, possibly in a loop,
> would be good, IMO.
>
> Jean's note about the broken variable initialization is correct. Should
> have done this differently.
>
> The other note about initialization only with platform_data is also a
> good idea.
>
> I'm using the chip on a custom ARM board without BIOS initialization,
> but providing platform_data in this case should be the correct way, anyway.
>
> So Chris, if you are already at it, do it this way. Otherwise please
> notify me and I can prepare patches.
>
> Thanks for your work!
>
> Roland
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
