who is this ?

Jean Delvare khali at linux-fr.org
Sat Aug 9 09:47:56 CEST 2003


> btw, if you update the detection to also check for 65 as version
> number you support the EMC6D102, I have not found any diffrences
> myself in the sheets.

Two things I found in our lm85 drivers:

1* It seems that the EMC6D10x has 3 more voltage inputs than the LM85.
We have the following specific defines for the EMC6D10x:
#define EMC6D100_REG_SFR  0x7c
#define EMC6D100_REG_ALARM3  0x7d
#define EMC6D100_REG_CONF  0x7f
#define EMC6D100_REG_INT_EN  0x80
/* IN5, IN6 and IN7 */
#define EMC6D100_REG_IN(nr)  (0x70 + ((nr)-5))
#define EMC6D100_REG_IN_MIN(nr) (0x73 + ((nr)-5) * 2)
#define EMC6D100_REG_IN_MAX(nr) (0x74 + ((nr)-5) * 2)

We don't use _SFR, _CONF nor _INT_EN in our code as far as I could see.

2* Interesting comment: "Unfortunately, we can't tell a '100 from a '101
from the registers. Since a '101 is a '100 in a package with fewer pins
and therefore no 3.3V, 1.5V or 1.8V inputs, perhaps if those inputs read
0, then it's a '101."

Well, I guess you'd have find all that in the datasheet anyway, but now
you know how we do handle these chips.

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/



More information about the lm-sensors mailing list