linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hwmon: Add support for max6695 and max6696 to lm90 driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:29:02 +0200
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	lm-sensors@...sensors.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: Add support for max6695 and max6696 to lm90 
 driver

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 06:56:54 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Too bad - registers 0x16 and 0x17 exist on both 6658 and 6659. So the only way to detect 6659 
> would be the address (0x4d or 0x4e), and we would mis-detect it on 0x4c. Is that worth it ?

I'd say adding support for the MAX6659 is worth it. Just don't add
detection. That is, all of MAX6657, 6658 and 6658 should be detected as
max6657, which has the minimum set of features. But if someone declares
a "max6659" device either as part of the platform data or from
user-space, then the driver should expose all the chip features.

Deal?

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/