On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:46:29 -0700, David Brownell wrote: > On Saturday 12 July 2008, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Why not just insist the 0x5x address be registered/probed? This > > > extra stuff is needless and confusing. > > > > Because some of the chips supported by this driver (max7319, max7321, > > max7322 and max7323) only use address 0x6x. > > That's not the behavior implemented here though ... it's always > creating a dummy, even when it's not needed.
Did you miss this comment of mine maybe? http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/i2c/2008-July/004267.html -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
