On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 01:53:05PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Add i2c_scan_dimm_bus to declare that a particular i2c_adapter >> contains DIMMs. This will probe (and autoload modules!) for useful >> SMBUS devices that live on DIMMs. >> >> As more SMBUS-addressable DIMM components become supported, this >> code can be extended to probe for them. >> > I don't think this code is necessary. The temperature sensor would be > auto-detected if you mark the bus driver as I2C_CLASS_HWMON, and DIM eeprom > auto-detection should not be needed. I'm not at all sure I want to mark this thing I2C_CLASS_HWMON. I don't want random hwmon drivers probing the bus. (Although I wouldn't need to -- jc42 is looking for I2C_CLASS_SPD.) Also, my code is IMO better than the i2c core probing code for several reasons: - i2c_imc is incompatible with the i2c core class-based detection code because it can't do a read byte operation. I believe that, because of exactly this limitation, devices soldered onto DIMMs are unlikely to ever require this operation. (LGA2011 is the premier platform for interesting DIMM-like devices right now.) So I'd have to modify the i2c core with more nasty hard-coded lists of what can be safely probed how, and ISTM that kind of thing is better handled in code that runs on busses that are really known to contain DIMMs (and not, say, i2c-gpio). - The eventual goal is to write a driver for NVDIMMs, which will also appear on this bus, and I want them to pull in the right drivers via modalias and udev, which the i2c core code can't do. To do this well, I'll want the SMBUS driver to pass in (via platform-data) information on which DIMM channel is which, and I don't know any way to do anything like that without using i2c_new_device. - Busses like i2c_i801 may or may not contain DIMMs. They do on some machines I have. But on my Core i7 Extreme box, there are no DIMMs on that bus, and there are no SPDs on that bus (i.e. addresses 0x50 through 0x57 don't answer), but there is an unknown device at address 0x19. I don't really want to think about whether it's safe to probe by, say, read_word_data(0). When NVDIMMs show up, even more bizarre addresses may be populated. My code can probe *carefully* by looking for SPDs first, whereas the i2c-core code is not nearly as careful. One option would be to move code like this into the core and replace I2C_CLASS_SPD with something like it. That way everything could get the benefit of DIMM-specific probing. --Andy _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
