On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Clearly the FDC37M81x has support now. Should we just leave > > both of them enabled? > > > > That, or maybe we can use some ID/revision field (or something > documented to be zero on one chip and documented to be 1 on the other > chip) to differentiate between them? > I couldn't find a FDC37M81x datasheet with those details, and the code documents global register 0x21 as NANA. I kinda brushed it off as one area where superiotool probably needs more sophisticated probing methods. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < [email protected]> wrote: > No problem, I was just surprised by the reasoning. You did explain it, > and the good thing is that you can test any further differentiators for > the code. > The ITE code uses a 16-bit identifier for this info... I wish the SMSC code could do the same :-/ -- David Hendricks (dhendrix) Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
