From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Cole Subject: Re: i2cset question Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:23:58 -0400 Message-ID: <49E8AD1E.1070805@gmail.com> References: <49E89342.1010807@gmail.com> <20090417174845.471d4d9d@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090417174845.471d4d9d-ig7AzVSIIG7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org > You are very lucky that you didn't write to a byte location < 0x40, > that would have broken the checksum and you would no longer be able to > boot your system. > > I encourage you to restore the value of byte 0x50 to what it originally > was and never ever again touch this SPD EEPROM. > > The "readback failed" warning is presumably because it takes some time > to the EEPROM to write the new data and in the meantime you can't read > from it. > > The MAX5434L has I2C address 0x28 or 0x29. It doesn't show on > i2cdetect. Check whether it's properly soldered. If it is, try i2cget > instead of i2cdetect, maybe the Maxim chip doesn't like the probes > i2cdetect does. > Ok, I think we were getting confused about the MAX45434L data sheet addressing and thought the address of 0x50 corresponded to the chip. I now see that the address should be 0x28, however I know it's soldered properly and I still can't see it with i2cget...am I dead in the water or is there possibly another way to approach this? Thanks, Chris