I have information on Winbond W83627EHF Chip
dhoffman_98 at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 8 16:14:32 CET 2005
Jean, and all...
I would be happy to run any tests and provide whatever information I
can. Unfortunately, this is not any work that I am doing on behalf of
my employer or any customer, so it's not so much of a "need to have" as
much as it is a "nice to have". That being said, I am not in a position
to contribute any hardware or financial support.
For right now, I can tell you that I am running Fedora Core 3 with
kernel 2.6.10-1.760_FC3smp. My motherboard is an ASUS P5P800.
I started looking to run i2cdump, but apparently there are no busses
found in my system, or at least there are no /dev/i2c* devices.
I tried isadump, but I'm not sure what you are expecting the output to
look like, or if the output I'm getting is valid data.
I'm not in front of the machine right now so I can't capture any data
from the BIOS screen, but I can do that later today.
I'd be happy to test any new versions you have, just let me know the
best way to retrieve them, and how you would like me to run them, and
what output or results you would like me to report back to you.
--- Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> wrote:
> Hi David,
> > I have a new motherboard with the W83627EHF from Winbond and of
> > my sensors-detect can't find the chip.
> > According to your site, you are looking for the data sheet for this
> > chip.
> That's right. What motherboard is it, BTW?
> For reference, David D. Madsen (CC) already requested support some
> > For the past 3 weeks, I have been trying to get in touch with
> people at
> > Winbond to get the data sheet. I explained that I was working with
> > people who develop drivers for monitoring sensors on open source
> > systems. Today, they finally sent me something along with a pretty
> > note.
> > Their rep wrote: "Hi David. I run Fedora core 2 over here on my
> > non-work computer so I appreciate the Open Source work that is done
> > our devices. Here is the latest data sheet on the 627EHF. Im
> > sure I can answer questions past what is in the data sheet but if
> > come up with some I can give it a try."
> > And he sent me the data file which I am attaching to this note.
> That's really great :)
> > I can only assume that you already have this information, and are
> > already working on an update, but I am seriously hoping that this
> > information is enough to get an update so that this chip can be
> > recognized and I can use lm-sensors on my machine.
> We didn't have it yet, so thanks a lot for the good work. With the
> datasheet we can now consider extending our Winbond drivers and
> user-space tools to support the W83627EHF.
> > Please let me know where this stands and if this driver is in the
> > works.
> Nothing in the works ATM. I've read the datasheet I found that the
> W83627EHF has the following differences when compared with the other
> chips of the family:
> * One additional voltage input.
> * 8mV LSB for voltages instead of 16mV.
> * Two additional fan inputs.
> * I2C interface, but no subclients?
> * One additional fan control output.
> * Fan control can optionally operate in DC mode.
> * 6-bit VID in Super-I/O space.
> I'd like someone else to read the datasheet and confirm/complete this
> list. Once we know exactly what the differences are, we can decide
> whether it is better to add support to an existing driver or create a
> new one. Some of the additional features would be trivial to add
> as the additional voltage input), but some are more tricky (VID for
> David (both), which kernel are you running?
> I have a patch for sensors-detect ready to start with, will commit
> evening (Europe) for you to test.
> I'd also appreciate a dump of your chips (isadump 0x295 0x296 or
> <bus id> 0x2d, whichever works for you). If possible, please also
> provide a sample output of hardware monitoring data provided by the
> setup screen.
> If any of you is willing to support the development of the W83627EHF
> support, either through the donation of hardware, or by simply paying
> developer to work on it, please let us know. That's obviously the
> ways to get the support added fast.
> If not, that doesn't mean we won't do it, of course, just that it'll
> be one task among the various others we have for the project, so
> is no guaranteed timeline. And having a real hardware chip to test
> code on is also very convenient and typically ensures better support
> the chip, regardless of how much time we take to write the driver in
> first place.
> Jean Delvare
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
More information about the lm-sensors