on 26/08/2009 01:27 said the following:
> Could you please forward me the patch to make it work in polling mode ? I'd
> like to test it as I've been trying to make intpm work with a SB400 (which
> should be quite the same as yours) but system hangs when I try to force
> polling mode (didn't hav
rences you just
presented). And btw, I didn't find any implementation using interrupt
neither but I'm ready to test your updated version.
Thanks,
Aurélien
- Original Message -
From: "Andriy Gapon"
To: ;
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 7:49 PM
Subject: AMD SB700 SMBu
According to SB700 specifications its SMBus controller is very similar to one in
PIIX4.
The differences that I see so far:
1. Interrupt Line/Interrupt Pin PCI configuration registers (0x3c, 0x3d) do not
specify interrupt number that the controller could use:
> This register specifies wh
> rev=0x04 hdr=0x00
> vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
> device = '82801FB (ICH6) SMBus Controller'
> class = serial bus
> subclass = SMBus
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/eeebsd >sudo pciconf -rb pci0:0:31:3: 0x40
> 01
> [EMAIL PROTECTED
Any reason why i2c mode in not enable in ichsmb?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:31:3:class=0x0c0500 card=0x82d81043 chip=0x266a8086
rev=0x04 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
device = '82801FB (ICH6) SMBus Controller'
class = serial bus
subcla
or showing constant temperature 255C.
Are you sure mbmon or healthd won't work? Forget smbus just try to
access the status chip directly. e.g. mbmon -p winbond -c 1 or healthd
-c 1. I have two (different from yours) ASUS motherboards with VIA
chipsets and healthd works on both and mb
t;> message) or showing constant temperature 255C.
>>
>> I'v tried to load smb/smbus/*pm modules - no effect, tried to recompile
>> kernel with:
>> device smbus
>> device viapm
>> device smb
>> device iic
>> device ic
>> device iicbus
mperature 255C.
I'v tried to load smb/smbus/*pm modules - no effect, tried to recompile kernel
with:
device smbus
device viapm
device smb
device iic
device ic
device iicbus
device iicbb
device iicsmb
no effect. Even NO /dev/smbX device present and 'dmesg | grep smb' or 'sysctl
'v tried to load smb/smbus/*pm modules - no effect, tried to recompile kernel
with:
device smbus
device viapm
device smb
device iic
device ic
device iicbus
device iicbb
device iicsmb
no effect. Even NO /dev/smbX device present and 'dmesg | grep smb' or 'sysctl
-a | grep thermal
I am writing a driver for a piece of hardware that can be communicated
with only through SMBus. My SMBus controller is already supported by
FreeBSD and I can do some testing from userland via ioctls of /dev/smb#.
I would like to learn how to do properly the following things in
kernel-land:
1
yet) and I want to know how
should I test with SMBus to make sure it works? Thanks!
Changed from 0x14 to 0x50 looks like it works without throw any error.
Update dmesg shows:
=
amdpm0: port 0x5000-0x501f,0xec00-0xec1f irq 23
at device 1.1 on pci0
smbus0:
= serial bus
subclass = SMBus
=
After pciconf:
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1:1: class=0x0c0500 card=0x57001462 chip=0x008410de rev=0xa1
hdr=0x00
vendor = 'NVIDIA Corporation'
device = 'nForce PCI
While trying to get hardware monitoring to work on my computer I
found the below procedure to enable the smbus device.
It didn't get me any closer to actually monitoring the hardware with
xbmon, lmmon or healthd. But the device is there.
Can this probe/tweak be done during boot somehow
thought immediately about bus_(setup|teardown)_intr. I wrote
something like that for smbus: bus_(setup|teardown)_alart (see patch),
that works now. But is this The Right Way to do it? I do have some
thoughts on it, but maybe someone more knowledgeable than me could comment
on it.
It might be better
:16 PDT 2002 \
root@asus:/usr/src/sys/compile/ASUS i386
The nVidia chip is not supported. I want to access the SMBus to add
some devices.
Of course, ASUS and nVidia will not provide the information necessary
to do this easily!
I have attached the output of pciconf -lv and dmesg w/ bootverbose
Hi,
we have a couple of 4.4-RELEASE machines that have both Intel 82801AA
(ICH) SMBus controllers and BrookTree 878 TV cards. Both of these attach
to smbus devices, the BrookTree to smbus0 and the Intel to smbus1.
The problem is that all system status utilities I tried (wmhm, wmlmmon,
etc
Nicolas Souchu wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:50:09PM +0100, Willem van Engen wrote:
> > I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> > When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
> > and attach functions are properl
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:50:09PM +0100, Willem van Engen wrote:
> I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
> and attach functions are properly called. I use the following
>
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Willem van Engen wrote:
> > DRIVER_MODULE(smb, smbus, smb_driver, smb_devclass, 0, 0);
> > so I guess not. But thanks anyway :)
>
> Yes, but the 'smbus' bus driver doesn't have an attachment to
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Willem van Engen $B$5$s$$$o$/(B:
>> And you will need to know grandparent device name to bind the device
>> collectly.(Or should we need a way to get device attribute such as
>> Mother board, Video Capture BitBang,Video Capture Cooked,VGA Card and etc.)
>I don't
Takanori Watanabe wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Willem van Engen $B$5$s$$$o$/(B:
> >I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> >When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
> >and attach funct
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Willem van Engen wrote:
> DRIVER_MODULE(smb, smbus, smb_driver, smb_devclass, 0, 0);
> so I guess not. But thanks anyway :)
Yes, but the 'smbus' bus driver doesn't have an attachment to your driver.
You're trying to create a device that provides
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Willem van Engen wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> > When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
> > and attach functions are properly
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Willem van Engen wrote:
> I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
> and attach functions are properly called. I use the following
> code to do that:
> D
> I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
The smbus probe/attach is broken; you're going to have to fix it before
this code will work properly. 8(
--
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponen
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Willem van Engen $B$5$s$$$o$/(B:
>I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
>When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
>and attach functions are properly called. I use the follow
It's currently working as an isa-child, but I'm still wondering
if it's the 'clean' way, since I only use smbus commands.
- Willem
Willem van Engen wrote:
>
> I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
> When I make the driver
I'm trying to write a module which should be a child of the smbus.
When I make the driver a child of the isa bus, identify, probe,
and attach functions are properly called. I use the following
code to do that:
DRIVER_MODULE(my, isa, my_driver, my_devclass, 0, 0);
But when I put it on the
gt; > On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 02:31:48PM -0200, Felipe Gustavo de Almeida wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > do you know about someone working on smbus drivers for
> > > > > VIA VT82C686A (the chipset from ASUS K7V MB) ?
> > > >
For anyone interested, I've written a first draft of a driver for
the SMBus controller in the Intel 82801AA (ICH) chip.
Not sure if or how well it works yet, but anyone wanting to play
around with it is welcome to do so.. some hacking may be required.
ftp://ftp.whistle.com/pub/archie
> I notice that the /dev/smbX devices are exclusive access. This makes
> it impossible to run two (or more) programs concurrently that want
> to talk to SMbus devices (in my case, healthd and lmmon, both of which
> want to open /dev/smb0 to access the LM78).
>
> Is this an SMb
> I notice that the /dev/smbX devices are exclusive access. This makes
> it impossible to run two (or more) programs concurrently that want
> to talk to SMbus devices (in my case, healthd and lmmon, both of which
> want to open /dev/smb0 to access the LM78).
>
> Is this an SMb
I notice that the /dev/smbX devices are exclusive access. This makes
it impossible to run two (or more) programs concurrently that want
to talk to SMbus devices (in my case, healthd and lmmon, both of which
want to open /dev/smb0 to access the LM78).
Is this an SMbus restriction, or an artifact
On Sat, Aug 21, 1999 at 02:46:51AM -0400, Mike Nowlin wrote:
>
>
>I had sent this message to -stable about a month ago, never heard anything
>-- so am trying it here.
Hmm lpbb seem to fail completly then...
I have to give it a try. Ask me again if I fail to remember. I'm a bit busy.
Thanks for
On Sat, Aug 21, 1999 at 02:46:51AM -0400, Mike Nowlin wrote:
>
>
>I had sent this message to -stable about a month ago, never heard anything
>-- so am trying it here.
Hmm lpbb seem to fail completly then...
I have to give it a try. Ask me again if I fail to remember. I'm a bit busy.
Thanks for
I had sent this message to -stable about a month ago, never heard anything
-- so am trying it here.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 03:24:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mike Nowlin
To: freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org
Subject: I2C/SMBus/LPBB
OK -- I give up I'm tryi
I had sent this message to -stable about a month ago, never heard anything
-- so am trying it here.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 03:24:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mike Nowlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I2C/SMBus/LPBB
OK -- I give up...
37 matches
Mail list logo
