cvs commit: src/sys/pci amdpm.c
ai at bmc.brk.ru
Fri Dec 16 02:42:29 PST 2005
> 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:
> 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
> 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 :)
More information about the freebsd-current