Guenter Roeck <linux <at> roeck-us.net> writes: > > > >./arch/arm/mach-at91/board-electrum-100.c is not in mainline, so this is a bit > > >difficult. Given the above, it may even be that there is a separate driver for > > >the chip somewhere in your tree (ok, I think I found the patch, there isn't, > > >but that means this never worked). > > I could have sworn that I saw it in mainline, but now that I check I > > see it is not there. Sorry about that! I am not sure what you mean > > as far as the driver never working and exactly what patch you are > > talking about. Could you clarify? > > http://stoian.us/misc/files/linux-3.3.0-micromint.patch > > Since the patch sets modalias to "adc128s052", and a driver with that name does > not exist in the kernel, it can not have worked, at least not with this > configuration. > Oh, I see what you are referring to now. That specicif modalias "adc128s052" is what I added to the adcxx driver in order to get it to bind to the device lsited there in that board configuration. > > >Other than that, there could be many things wrong. Chip select, bus number, > > >clock speed, chip access mode. There is no example for a working instantiation > > >in the upstream kernel, so I have no idea what the valid parameters might be. > > >You mentioned user mode access worked - maybe you can compare it with the kernel > > >settings. > > As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong here, this is all still > > pretty new to me) the bus and chip select are all correct. Clock > > speed could be an issue I suppose. I just did the reverse math on > > the value that the driver is reporting and realized that before it > > is converted, the raw value is 2 bytes worth of 1's. I am going to > > trace through the spi_write_then_read() function in the adcxx driver > > and compare its method to that used by the user mode program and the > > atmel_spi driver. I'm not sure how far I am going to get though. > > > > Doesn't sound good, and I am not entirely sure if using spi_write_then_read () is > correct for this chip. You might try the access in single-channel mode to see if > it makes a difference. You are most definitely right. After doing a little reading, I realize that I am going to be doing a little bit of driver 'rewriting' tomorrow. More specifically, I am going to adapt the adcxx protocol driver to use the functions from the atmel_spi controller driver. I will report back with results when finished, though I will more likely be back with more questions before than. Thanks again for the guidance. John > > Guenter > _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
