Mark D. Studebaker
mds at paradyne.com
Thu Jul 3 03:37:43 CEST 2003
agreed that a separate driver for lm83 is best, and that
eventually adm1023 support should be moved out of adm1021.
BTW Nat. Semi has always had the best datasheets in the industry.
Also, if you ever have a chance to see Bob Pease on his lecture tour
don't miss it...
Jean Delvare wrote:
>>I would recommend extending the adm1021 driver. It's a relatively
>>simple driver and not nearly as complex as the w83781d. And the
>>supported chips have fewer differences.
> After taking a look at the code, I had come to the opposite conclusion.
> The adm1021 driver handles only 2 temperature sensors while the LM83
> specificity is that it has 4 temperature sensors. If we are to limit the
> LM83 to 2 temperature readings, then it becomes a LM84 that is already
> supported. And changing the adm1021 driver code to support 4 temperature
> sensors probably makes no sense. So I was planing to write a new driver
> for the LM83.
> Wether or not existing support should then be moved from adm1021 to lm83
> could be discussed later (although my arguments right above make it
> quite obvious that older chipsets should be kept supported by adm1021).
>>You should probably look at modularizing the extended features
>> You can look at my lm85.c driver for an example.
> I'll take a look at the code and see if it can change my mind. As said
> in a previous post, I never write a driver myself so my opinion may not
> be the wisest.
> One thing that should be taken into account however is the fact that the
> adm1021 driver already supports 8 devices, which is our current max.
> Adding a ninth chipset to this driver would introduce (again)
More information about the lm-sensors