on 20/10/2008 00:06 Uwe Hermann said the following:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 06:26:52PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Add register definitions for W83627HF based on publicly available
specification and local testing.
Also tweak a little bit algorithm for (internal) device id calculation:
chips from W83627HF/F/HG/G family have id of 0x52 and a multitude of
revisions (0x1x, 0x3A, 0x41, maybe more), chips from W83627HF/GF family
have the same device id but revisions 0xFx.
Signed-off-by: Andriy Gapon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Looks good, thanks! Committed in r3670.
In addition, I've added your name to the list of contributors in the
README,
Uwe, thanks a lot!
> and I removed...
Index: winbond.c
===================================================================
--- winbond.c (revision 3667)
+++ winbond.c (working copy)
@@ -39,7 +39,46 @@
/* ID and rev[3..0] */
{0x527, "W83977CTF", { /* TODO: Not yet in sensors-detect */
{EOT}}},
[...]
+ {0xa, "ACPI",
+ /* Note: Datasheet says 0xe2 can't be read/written. */
... this line. It seem to be copy-paste from some other Super I/O, the
datasheet for this one doesn't seem to say that 0xe2 cannot be read/written
anywhere (or at least I didn't find that place).
I was going to do the same but then noticed that this register is just
mentioned in documentation, there is a section and a name for it, but
there is zero description, the section is just empty.
So I kept that line to be on the "safe side", but I agree with its removal.
+ {0x30,0x70,0xe0,0xe1,0xe2,0xe3,0xe4,0xe5,0xe6,0xe7,
+ 0xf0,0xf1,0xf3,0xf4,0xf6,0xf7,0xf9,0xfe,0xff,EOT},
+ {0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,MISC,MISC,MISC,0x00,0x00,0x00,
+ 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,RSVD,RSVD,EOT}},
Uwe.
--
Andriy Gapon
--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
