All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: djwong@us.ibm.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] lm90: Support the MAX6648/6692 chips
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:44:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090305174418.02fd9593@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090305154729.GL6550@plum>

Hi Darrick,

On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:47:30 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > I am confused. According to my notes, the MAX6648/MAX6692 is the same
> > chip as the MAX6646/MAX6647/MAX6649 (same chip ID of 0x59), the only
> > difference being the I2C address (0x4c for the MAX6646, 0x4e for the
> > MAX6647 and 0x4d for the MAX6648/MAX6649/MAX6692). So the current code
> > should _already_ detect your MAX6648 or MAX6692 as kind = max6646.
> 
> Heh, yep, it does.  I guess this patch has been sitting around long
> enough to become obsolete, sorry for the unnecessary mail traffic.  I
> guess we can drop this one.

Well, confusion probably would have been avoided if it had been
properly documented that the MAX6648 and MAX6692 were already
supported. So I think we should still apply the Kconfig part of your
patch. Documentation/hwmon/lm90 would need a small update as well.
Could you please send an updated patch doing this? I would be happy to
apply that.

Thanks,
-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: djwong@us.ibm.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lm90: Support the MAX6648/6692 chips
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:44:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090305174418.02fd9593@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090305154729.GL6550@plum>

Hi Darrick,

On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:47:30 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > I am confused. According to my notes, the MAX6648/MAX6692 is the same
> > chip as the MAX6646/MAX6647/MAX6649 (same chip ID of 0x59), the only
> > difference being the I2C address (0x4c for the MAX6646, 0x4e for the
> > MAX6647 and 0x4d for the MAX6648/MAX6649/MAX6692). So the current code
> > should _already_ detect your MAX6648 or MAX6692 as kind = max6646.
> 
> Heh, yep, it does.  I guess this patch has been sitting around long
> enough to become obsolete, sorry for the unnecessary mail traffic.  I
> guess we can drop this one.

Well, confusion probably would have been avoided if it had been
properly documented that the MAX6648 and MAX6692 were already
supported. So I think we should still apply the Kconfig part of your
patch. Documentation/hwmon/lm90 would need a small update as well.
Could you please send an updated patch doing this? I would be happy to
apply that.

Thanks,
-- 
Jean Delvare

  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-05 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-02 21:01 [lm-sensors] [PATCH] lm90: Support the MAX6648/6692 chips Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-02 21:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-02 23:04 ` [lm-sensors] " Andrew Morton
2009-03-02 23:04   ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-03  7:47   ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2009-03-03  7:47     ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-03  8:04     ` [lm-sensors] " Andrew Morton
2009-03-03  8:04       ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-04 15:27       ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2009-03-04 15:27         ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-02 23:07 ` [lm-sensors] " Andrew Morton
2009-03-02 23:07   ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-04 15:28   ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2009-03-04 15:28     ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 14:25 ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 14:25   ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 15:47   ` [lm-sensors] " Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-05 15:47     ` Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-05 16:44     ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2009-03-05 16:44       ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 17:37       ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH] lm90: Document support for the MAX6648/6692 Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-05 17:37         ` [PATCH] lm90: Document support for the MAX6648/6692 chips Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-05 18:01         ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH] lm90: Document support for the Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 18:01           ` [PATCH] lm90: Document support for the MAX6648/6692 chips Jean Delvare
2009-03-05 17:58       ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH] lm90: Update Documentation/hwmon/lm90 to Darrick J. Wong
2009-03-05 17:58         ` [PATCH] lm90: Update Documentation/hwmon/lm90 to reflect max6648/92 support Darrick J. Wong

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090305174418.02fd9593@hyperion.delvare \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=djwong@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.