From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 10:42:29 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2020716A420; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:42:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ai@bmc.brk.ru) Received: from stalker.bmc.brk.ru (stalker.bmc.brk.ru [217.150.59.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FAB843D49; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:42:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ai@bmc.brk.ru) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:42:25 +0300 From: Artemiev Igor To: Ruslan Ermilov Message-Id: <20051216134225.09aa93a3.ai@bmc.brk.ru> In-Reply-To: <20051216083657.GA41326@ip.net.ua> References: <200512141749.jBEHnjRV081112@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051214183345.GE51686@ip.net.ua> <20051215093643.694e995b.ai@bmc.brk.ru> <200512151306.57961.jhb@freebsd.org> <20051216083657.GA41326@ip.net.ua> Organization: Bryansk Medical Center X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.0beta4 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i386-portbld-freebsd5.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pci amdpm.c X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:42:29 -0000 > OK, I looked some more, and I doubt the usefullness of the > nForce-2/3/4 support in its current shape. Perhaps I'm mistaken and > you can shed a light on this. :-) > The amdpm(4) driver originally supported AMD-756's PMC SMBus 1.0. > Later, AMD-8111 support was added. All of these AMDs seem to support > both SMBus 2.0 and SMBus 1.0 interfaces, and the driver uses the SMBus > 1.0 interface (offset 0xe0). The nForce seems to also support SMBus > 1.0 interface (offset 0). At least, the following lm_sensors pages > amd AMD-8111 datasheet confirm this: > > http://www.lm-sensors.org/supported.html > http://www2.lm-sensors.nu/~lm78/cvs/lm_sensors2/doc/busses/i2c-amd756 > http://www2.lm-sensors.nu/~lm78/cvs/lm_sensors2/doc/busses/i2c-amd8111 > > Now, the same supported.html page and googling says that nForce2/3/4 > MCPs all use SMBus 2.0 interface similar to AMD-8111 SMBus 2amd86.0 > interface. But we don't support SMBus 2.0 interface in amdpm(4)! > (lm_sensors, OTOH, does implement SMBus 2.0.). i2c-amd756.c, i2c-amd8111.c and i2c-nforce2.c looks very similar for me. Differences between i2c-amd756 and i2c-nforce2.c/i2c-amd8111.c in pair ioctl. > I don't know about nForce2, perhaps it implements SMBus 1.0 similar to > nForce (I can't find information anywhere), but it doesn't match > lm_sensors sources which uses SMBus 2.0 on nForce2/3/4, and uses > different drivers for AMD-8111(SMBus 1.0)/nForce and nForce2/3/4. > Igor, can you show me the output of "mbmon -S -c10 1" on your nForce2 Sorry, i can make this only tomorow. > based machine? Because, like I said, I get the nonsense with nForce3 > Pro150, after solving the "could not map i/o space" problem, and I > think this may be due to accessing SMBus 2.0 as SMBus 1.0. Burp. I guess, nForce3 have the overlapped regions, it`s not a problem SMBus v1.0 vs SMBus 2.0 at bus resource allocation time. In any time, i`m too lame to talk about this now :) -- iprefetch ai