who is this ?
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.
More information about the lm-sensors