Hi Maxime,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:58:41PM +0200, Maxime Jayat wrote:
> I don't think it is wrong to use ncpXXxh103 instead of ncp15xh103,
> because the first number refers to the physical size of the thermistor
> and should not change its behavior. In fact the datasheet does the same
> kind of
I don't think it is wrong to use ncpXXxh103 instead of ncp15xh103,
because the first number refers to the physical size of the thermistor
and should not change its behavior. In fact the datasheet does the same
kind of grouping.
I was just wondering what was the reason for the discrepancy between t
Hello Joseph,
You recently added support for the ncpXXxh103 in
drivers/hwmon/ntc_thermistor.c with the following array of values:
+static const struct ntc_compensation ncpXXxh103[] = {
+ { .temp_c = -40, .ohm = 247565 },
+ { .temp_c = -35, .ohm = 181742 },
+
3 matches
Mail list logo
