linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (sht3x) add support for SHT85

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d11e3cf6-3095-46df-a4f2-442d209675b1@roeck-us.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 19:09:55 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Antoni Pokusinski <apokusinski01@...il.com>, jdelvare@...e.com,
 corbet@....net
Cc: linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (sht3x) add support for SHT85

On 12/9/25 13:19, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/9/25 09:58, Antoni Pokusinski wrote:
>> SHT85 is a temperature and humidity sensor with an interface very
>> similar to SHT3x. However, it does not feature alerts (and therefore
>> limits).
>>
> 
> The datasheet does suggest that the chip supports both temperature and
> humidity tracking alert status, which only makes sense if the chip
> supports alert limits. It does not support an alert _pin_, but that
> doesn't mean that it does not support limits. I'll want to see definite
> confirmation that the chip does not support the limit commands.
> 

Looking closer into the SHT85 datasheet, the sensor chip is actually a SHT35.
Given that, disabling limit attributes and alarms is neither necessary
nor acceptable. It isn't even necessary to add "sht85" to the device ID
table; sht3x works just fine. I don't mind if it is added, but it does
not need a new chip ID (at least until/unless interrupt support is added
to the driver).

Thanks,
Guenter