On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 07:09:44 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
quoted text
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 05:51:23AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 01:31:44 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 04:13:45AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 01:07:04 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > I'll also add a check for the HG-I.
> > > > 
> > > > Do you have a datasheet for that one too?
> > > > 
> > > No. However, since we have a tester, we will have test coverage,
> > > so I figured it should be worth a try. If it doesn't work
> > > I can still drop it from the final patch.
> > 
> > FYI, I have a datasheet, which unfortunately I am not allowed to share.
> > Please let me know if you want me to look up something for you.
> > 
> How about the changed registers ? Would give us an idea if the chip is closer to 
> 667 or to 667-B.

There is no summary of this available. The only way is to go through
both datasheets and compare all registers in sequence. This takes time,
which is exactly why I couldn't find the time to do it :(

quoted text
> > > I suspect it is the same as the HG with a different chip ID.
> > 
> > Beware, it's a different device number (677 vs. 667) so I would expect
> > more differences.
>
> Ah, I missed that. I thought it was 667-I. Yes, you are right, that suggests
> more differences.

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/