[lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: f71882fg: Add support for the Fintek F71808E
Hans de Goede
hdegoede at redhat.com
Fri Aug 13 12:56:44 CEST 2010
On 08/04/2010 05:44 PM, Giel van Schijndel wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 13:36:22 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 08/01/2010 03:30, Giel van Schijndel wrote:
>>> Allow device probing to recognise the Fintek F71808E.
>>> Sysfs interface:
>>> * Fan/pwm control is the same as for F71889FG
>> My datasheet strongly disagrees with this the F71889FG has 5 pwm zones
>> each with their own speed divided by 4 boundary temps, where as
>> the F71808E has 3 pwm zones divided by 2 boundary temps. So it is much
>> more like the F71862FG, which also has 2 boundary temps, and 3 pwm zones,
>> *but* the F71862FG has one pwm zone hardwired to 100%.
> I'm assuming that by "pwm zone" you mean a separate PWM output channel?
> I.e. each "pwm zone" controls a single fan?
With pwm zone I mean the number of different speeds which can be programmed
for one output channel, the temps divide the entire temp range into zones
(number of zones == number of temps + 1) and for each zone one can then
tell at what speed / pwm setting the fan should operate when the temperature
is in that zone.
>> Also while making changes, I must say I don't like the splitting
>> of fxxxx_temp_attr into fxxxx_temp_attr and f71862_temp_attr just because
>> the number of sensors differs. I think it would be better to instead
>> make fxxxx_temp_attr a 2 dimensional array like fxxxx_fan_attr and like
>> with fxxxx_fan_attr register as many sensor attr blocks as the specific
>> model has.
> Right, that's probably a nicer way of going about it, I think that might
> be easier done in a separate patch (most likely preceding the addition
> of F71808E support), though I'll look at that.
Yes first splitting the attr in a separate patch would be very good.
>>> Signed-off-by: Giel van Schijndel<me at mortis.eu>
>>> Documentation/hwmon/f71882fg | 4 ++
>>> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 6 ++--
>>> drivers/hwmon/f71882fg.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 3 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/f71882fg b/Documentation/hwmon/f71882fg
>>> index a7952c2..1a07fd6 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/hwmon/f71882fg
>>> +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/f71882fg
>>> @@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ Kernel driver f71882fg
>>> Supported chips:
>>> + * Fintek F71808E
>>> + Prefix: 'f71808fg'
>> This is wrong, as you already indicate and the datasheet as well this
>> chip in question is an f71808e not an f71808fg, also note that there is
>> an f71808a model as well which is different (and has a different super io
>> chip id).
> Ah yes, I think I, wrongly, assumed that 'fg' was just some suffix used
> in this driver. For example, I cannot find F71889FG in the datasheet I
> have, only 'F71889' along with 'F71889F' in the section "Ordering
> Information" (for the F71889 I've got datasheet version V0.17P released
> December 2008).
I have a V0.27P datasheet for the 71889, but yes the fg suffix does not
seem to be mentioned anywhere in the datasheet not sure where it comes from.
I do know however that there are now new chips coming out with different
a and e suffixes so I suggest that we stay with fg for the old chips and
use a and e to distuingish the new ones.
> At the same time the F71808E datasheet I have clearly marks the chip as
> F71808E all over the entire datasheet (version V0.17P released October
> Either way I changed that ^^ portion of documentation while changing the
> enumeration value 'f71808fg' -> 'f71808e' in the code itself as well.
>> One last request in the second switch case in f71882fg_remove()
>> there is a default label which contains a comment which models it applies
>> to, please add the f71808e to that comment.
> Wouldn't it be better, to instead replace that 'default' label with a
> serie of case labels that code applies to? Along with providing the
> same documentation effect (expressed in C instead of English) it would
> cause GCC to warn whenever one of the chips was forgotten in a switch
Ack, if you could do that that would be great! Please do that
in a preparation patch though and not in the main patch.
> PS For comparison, which datasheet versions do you have?
> All Fintek datasheets I have access to:
> * F71808E - V0.17P, October 2009
> * F71858 - V0.26P, July 2007
> * F71862 - V0.28P, July 2008
> * F71882 - V0.24P, November 2006
> * F71889 - V0.17P, December 2008
> Those most interesting are of course the F71808E, F71862 and F71889---as
> you refer to those in your text. This because I have already had
> experience with a hardware vendor giving me the wrong datasheets and
> would like to prevent any such mistakes from causing similar
> communication problems here.
Here is my list:
More information about the lm-sensors