Hi Adrian,
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 00:29:13 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> While looking at the code, I also noted the following:
>
> quirk_sis_96x_compatible() is pretty useless since all it does is to set
> a static variable that is only used in a printk().
>
> quirk_sis_96x_compatible() was added with:
>
>
> 2003/05/13 13:48:50-07:00 mhoffman
> [PATCH] i2c: Add SiS96x I2C/SMBus driver
>
> This patch adds support for the SMBus of SiS96x south
> bridges. It is based on i2c-sis645.c from the lm sensors
> project, which never made it into an official kernel and
> was anyway mis-named.
>
> This driver works on my SiS 645/961 board vs w83781d.
>
>
> It's usage in
>
>
> static void __init quirk_sis_503_smbus(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> if (sis_96x_compatible)
> quirk_sis_96x_smbus(dev);
> }
>
>
> Was removed in
>
>
> Author: torvalds <torvalds>
> Date: Thu Oct 30 19:03:38 2003 +0000
>
> Stop SIS 96x chips from lying about themselves.
>
> Some machines with the SIS 96x southbridge have it set up
> to claim it is a SIS 503 chip. That breaks irq routing logic
> among other things. Fix it properly by making everybody aware
> of the duplicity.
>
>
> Was this intentional (and quirk_sis_96x_compatible() should be removed),
> or is this a bug that should be fixed?
I noticed this too in April 2006, see:
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2006-April/016016.html
Quoting myself back then:
"The whole sis_96x_compatible stuff looks superfluous now. It was used
before 2.6.0-test10, but we could certainly get rid of it now."
I do not think there is a bug here, or someone would have complained by
now. Note though that I do not have a SiS-based motherboard to test on.
Mark may be able to help with testing.
Thanks,
--
Jean Delvare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
