From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:29:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: Add support for max6695 and max6696 Message-Id: <20100908172902.6ed57505@hyperion.delvare> List-Id: References: <1283639675-31714-1-git-send-email-guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> <20100906181229.2e25db07@hyperion.delvare> <20100908102816.GA10676@ericsson.com> <20100908134854.2c60f406@hyperion.delvare> <20100908135654.GA11277@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <20100908135654.GA11277@ericsson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Andrew Morton , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 06:56:54 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Too bad - registers 0x16 and 0x17 exist on both 6658 and 6659. So the only way to detect 6659 > would be the address (0x4d or 0x4e), and we would mis-detect it on 0x4c. Is that worth it ? I'd say adding support for the MAX6659 is worth it. Just don't add detection. That is, all of MAX6657, 6658 and 6658 should be detected as max6657, which has the minimum set of features. But if someone declares a "max6659" device either as part of the platform data or from user-space, then the driver should expose all the chip features. Deal? -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755798Ab0IHP3W (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:29:22 -0400 Received: from zone0.gcu-squad.org ([212.85.147.21]:32449 "EHLO services.gcu-squad.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755659Ab0IHP3T (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:29:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:29:02 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Andrew Morton , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: Add support for max6695 and max6696 to lm90 driver Message-ID: <20100908172902.6ed57505@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20100908135654.GA11277@ericsson.com> References: <1283639675-31714-1-git-send-email-guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> <20100906181229.2e25db07@hyperion.delvare> <20100908102816.GA10676@ericsson.com> <20100908134854.2c60f406@hyperion.delvare> <20100908135654.GA11277@ericsson.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.14.4; i586-suse-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 06:56:54 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Too bad - registers 0x16 and 0x17 exist on both 6658 and 6659. So the only way to detect 6659 > would be the address (0x4d or 0x4e), and we would mis-detect it on 0x4c. Is that worth it ? I'd say adding support for the MAX6659 is worth it. Just don't add detection. That is, all of MAX6657, 6658 and 6658 should be detected as max6657, which has the minimum set of features. But if someone declares a "max6659" device either as part of the platform data or from user-space, then the driver should expose all the chip features. Deal? -- Jean Delvare