Hi Guenter, Josef,
On Sun, 11 May 2014 15:40:21 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 05/11/2014 06:00 AM, Josef Gajdusek wrote:
> > @@ -366,14 +433,19 @@ static int emc1403_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > }
> >
> > static const unsigned short emc1403_address_list[] = {
> > - 0x18, 0x29, 0x4c, 0x4d, I2C_CLIENT_END
> > + /* emc1403/emc1404/emc1423/emc1424 */
> > + 0x4c, 0x4d, 0x18, 0x29,
> > + /* emc1412 */
> > + 0x5c, 0x4c, 0x6c, 0x1c, 0x3c, I2C_CLIENT_END
>
> No duplication of addresses, and addresses are by convention in order.
> Jean, any addresses which should not be scanned ?
0x3c and 0x6c should indeed not be scanned, sensors-detect does not
scan them as they aren't typically used by hwmon devices. 0x5c is
questionable (currently scanned, but used only by a limited number of
chips, we may drop it at some point.) 0x1c and 0x4c are OK to scan.
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
