On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Guenter Roeck <groeck-dsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
They don't work but I don't know why. Until we have a datasheet, I'd like to leave them in the *experimental* driver and wait for a second opinion from someone who actually has the chip.
Ok, fine with me.
it87_find() seems to have identified the correct features of the IT8603. I don't understand your concern with the way it is currently working.
Regards,
David
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 01:00:30AM -0700, David Hubbard wrote:I don't think it is a good idea to report attributes which "appear to be
> I'd like to send the same patch again but add signed-off-by this time :) I
> apologize.
>
> * * * * *
>
> Add experimental support for the it8603e chip (Asus f2a85-m motherboard)
> Write only tested for pwmN and pwmN_enable.
> Read tested, but the following appear broken:
> alarms
> fanN_alarm
> inN_alarm
> inN_max
> inN_min
> intrusionN_alarm
> pwmN_auto_channels_temp
> pwmN_freq
broken". At least for the voltage limits and the alarms it should be relatively
easy to find out if they work/don't work. Whatever doesn't work should not be
there.
They don't work but I don't know why. Until we have a datasheet, I'd like to leave them in the *experimental* driver and wait for a second opinion from someone who actually has the chip.
Other IT87xx chips report the AMDSTI/PCH temperature as one of the inputs. This
> temp3_input (there is no 3rd analog temp input to the chip)
>
is usually configurable.
Ok, fine with me.
Another question is to what extend we can depend on the logic in it87_find() to
detect enabled chip features. It might make more sense to create another if case
in that function to handle the IT8603 separately.
it87_find() seems to have identified the correct features of the IT8603. I don't understand your concern with the way it is currently working.
Regards,
David
_______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
