TUF GAMING B550M-E WIFI motherboard is incorrectly named as
TUF GAMING B550M-E (WI-FI).
Validated by dmidecode output from https://github.com/linuxhw/DMI/
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204807
Signed-off-by: Denis Pauk <[email protected]>
---
drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
index 24c67dbfa8ab2..0ded82ac7fd31 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
@@ -1095,7 +1095,7 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
"ROG STRIX Z490-H GAMING",
"ROG STRIX Z490-I GAMING",
"TUF GAMING B550M-E",
- "TUF GAMING B550M-E (WI-FI)",
+ "TUF GAMING B550M-E WIFI",
"TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS (WI-FI)",
"TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS WIFI II",
--
2.39.2
Boards such as
* EX-B660M-V5 D4,
* PRIME A520M-A,
* PRIME A520M-A II,
* PRIME A520M-E,
* PRIME A520M-K,
* PRIME B360M-A,
* PRIME B360M-C,
* PRIME B460M-A R2.0,
* PRIME B550M-A AC,
* PRIME B550M-A WIFI II,
* PRIME B550M-K,
* PRIME B650M-A AX II,
* PRIME Z590-P WIFI,
* PRIME Z590-V,
* Pro A520M-C,
* Pro A520M-C II,
* ProArt B650-CREATOR,
* ProArt Z790-CREATOR WIFI,
* Pro B660M-C,
* Pro WS W680-ACE,
* Pro WS W680-ACE IPMI,
* ROG MAXIMUS XIII APEX,
* ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME,
* ROG MAXIMUS XIII HERO,
* ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX,
* ROG MAXIMUS Z790 EXTREME,
* ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI,
* ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI,
* ROG STRIX Z590-E GAMING WIFI,
* ROG STRIX Z590-F GAMING WIFI,
* ROG STRIX Z590-I GAMING WIFI,
* TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS,
* TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS II,
* TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI,
* TUF GAMING B660M-E D4,
* TUF GAMING B660-PLUS WIFI D4,
* TUF GAMING X570-PLUS_BR,
* TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS,
* Z490-GUNDAM (WI-FI),
* Z590 WIFI GUNDAM EDITION
have got a nct6775 chip, but by default there's no use of it
because of resource conflict with WMI method.
This commit adds such boards to the WMI monitoring list.
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204807
Signed-off-by: Denis Pauk <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Nick Owens <[email protected]>
Tested-by: A. M. <[email protected]>
---
drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
index 0ded82ac7fd31..2c1a47e756bf3 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
@@ -1058,14 +1058,26 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
"ProArt Z490-CREATOR 10G",
"Pro B550M-C",
"Pro WS X570-ACE",
+ "PRIME A520M-A",
+ "PRIME A520M-A II",
+ "PRIME A520M-E",
+ "PRIME A520M-K",
"PRIME B360-PLUS",
+ "PRIME B360M-A",
+ "PRIME B360M-C",
"PRIME B460-PLUS",
+ "PRIME B460M-A R2.0",
"PRIME B550-PLUS",
"PRIME B550M-A",
"PRIME B550M-A (WI-FI)",
+ "PRIME B550M-A AC",
+ "PRIME B550M-A WIFI II",
+ "PRIME B550M-K",
"PRIME H410M-R",
"PRIME X570-P",
"PRIME X570-PRO",
+ "Pro A520M-C",
+ "Pro A520M-C II",
"ROG CROSSHAIR VIII DARK HERO",
"ROG CROSSHAIR VIII EXTREME",
"ROG CROSSHAIR VIII FORMULA",
@@ -1094,6 +1106,9 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
"ROG STRIX Z490-G GAMING (WI-FI)",
"ROG STRIX Z490-H GAMING",
"ROG STRIX Z490-I GAMING",
+ "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS",
+ "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS II",
+ "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI",
"TUF GAMING B550M-E",
"TUF GAMING B550M-E WIFI",
"TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS",
@@ -1104,16 +1119,20 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
"TUF GAMING B550-PRO",
"TUF GAMING X570-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)",
+ "TUF GAMING X570-PLUS_BR",
"TUF GAMING X570-PRO (WI-FI)",
"TUF GAMING Z490-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING Z490-PLUS (WI-FI)",
+ "Z490-GUNDAM (WI-FI)",
};
static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
+ "EX-B660M-V5 D4",
"EX-B660M-V5 PRO D4",
"PRIME B650-PLUS",
"PRIME B650M-A",
"PRIME B650M-A AX",
+ "PRIME B650M-A AX II",
"PRIME B650M-A II",
"PRIME B650M-A WIFI",
"PRIME B650M-A WIFI II",
@@ -1124,20 +1143,33 @@ static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
"PRIME X670E-PRO WIFI",
"PRIME Z590-A",
"PRIME Z590-P",
+ "PRIME Z590-P WIFI",
+ "PRIME Z590-V",
"PRIME Z590M-PLUS",
+ "Pro B660M-C",
"Pro B660M-C-D4",
+ "Pro WS W680-ACE",
+ "Pro WS W680-ACE IPMI",
+ "ProArt B650-CREATOR",
"ProArt B660-CREATOR D4",
"ProArt X670E-CREATOR WIFI",
+ "ProArt Z790-CREATOR WIFI",
"ROG CROSSHAIR X670E EXTREME",
"ROG CROSSHAIR X670E GENE",
"ROG CROSSHAIR X670E HERO",
+ "ROG MAXIMUS XIII APEX",
+ "ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME",
"ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME GLACIAL",
+ "ROG MAXIMUS XIII HERO",
+ "ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX",
"ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME",
"ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL",
+ "ROG MAXIMUS Z790 EXTREME",
"ROG STRIX B650-A GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX B650E-E GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX B650E-F GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX B650E-I GAMING WIFI",
+ "ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI D4",
"ROG STRIX B660-F GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX B660-G GAMING WIFI",
@@ -1146,16 +1178,24 @@ static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
"ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX X670E-F GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX X670E-I GAMING WIFI",
+ "ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI II",
+ "ROG STRIX Z590-E GAMING WIFI",
+ "ROG STRIX Z590-F GAMING WIFI",
+ "ROG STRIX Z590-I GAMING WIFI",
"ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4",
"TUF GAMING B650-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI",
"TUF GAMING B650M-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING B650M-PLUS WIFI",
+ "TUF GAMING B660-PLUS WIFI D4",
+ "TUF GAMING B660M-E D4",
"TUF GAMING B660M-PLUS WIFI",
"TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI",
+ "TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS",
"TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS WIFI",
+ "Z590 WIFI GUNDAM EDITION",
};
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)
--
2.39.2
On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C II"
patch?
> Boards such as
> * EX-B660M-V5 D4,
> * PRIME A520M-A,
> * PRIME A520M-A II,
> * PRIME A520M-E,
> * PRIME A520M-K,
> * PRIME B360M-A,
> * PRIME B360M-C,
> * PRIME B460M-A R2.0,
> * PRIME B550M-A AC,
> * PRIME B550M-A WIFI II,
> * PRIME B550M-K,
> * PRIME B650M-A AX II,
> * PRIME Z590-P WIFI,
> * PRIME Z590-V,
> * Pro A520M-C,
> * Pro A520M-C II,
> * ProArt B650-CREATOR,
> * ProArt Z790-CREATOR WIFI,
> * Pro B660M-C,
> * Pro WS W680-ACE,
> * Pro WS W680-ACE IPMI,
> * ROG MAXIMUS XIII APEX,
> * ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME,
> * ROG MAXIMUS XIII HERO,
> * ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX,
> * ROG MAXIMUS Z790 EXTREME,
> * ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI,
> * ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI,
> * ROG STRIX Z590-E GAMING WIFI,
> * ROG STRIX Z590-F GAMING WIFI,
> * ROG STRIX Z590-I GAMING WIFI,
> * TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS,
> * TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS II,
> * TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI,
> * TUF GAMING B660M-E D4,
> * TUF GAMING B660-PLUS WIFI D4,
> * TUF GAMING X570-PLUS_BR,
> * TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS,
> * Z490-GUNDAM (WI-FI),
> * Z590 WIFI GUNDAM EDITION
> have got a nct6775 chip, but by default there's no use of it
> because of resource conflict with WMI method.
>
> This commit adds such boards to the WMI monitoring list.
>
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204807
> Signed-off-by: Denis Pauk <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Nick Owens <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: A. M. <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
> b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c index 0ded82ac7fd31..2c1a47e756bf3 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/nct6775-platform.c
> @@ -1058,14 +1058,26 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
> "ProArt Z490-CREATOR 10G",
> "Pro B550M-C",
> "Pro WS X570-ACE",
> + "PRIME A520M-A",
> + "PRIME A520M-A II",
> + "PRIME A520M-E",
> + "PRIME A520M-K",
> "PRIME B360-PLUS",
> + "PRIME B360M-A",
> + "PRIME B360M-C",
> "PRIME B460-PLUS",
> + "PRIME B460M-A R2.0",
> "PRIME B550-PLUS",
> "PRIME B550M-A",
> "PRIME B550M-A (WI-FI)",
> + "PRIME B550M-A AC",
> + "PRIME B550M-A WIFI II",
> + "PRIME B550M-K",
> "PRIME H410M-R",
> "PRIME X570-P",
> "PRIME X570-PRO",
> + "Pro A520M-C",
> + "Pro A520M-C II",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR VIII DARK HERO",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR VIII EXTREME",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR VIII FORMULA",
> @@ -1094,6 +1106,9 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
> "ROG STRIX Z490-G GAMING (WI-FI)",
> "ROG STRIX Z490-H GAMING",
> "ROG STRIX Z490-I GAMING",
> + "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS",
> + "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS II",
> + "TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI",
> "TUF GAMING B550M-E",
> "TUF GAMING B550M-E WIFI",
> "TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS",
> @@ -1104,16 +1119,20 @@ static const char * const asus_wmi_boards[] = {
> "TUF GAMING B550-PRO",
> "TUF GAMING X570-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)",
> + "TUF GAMING X570-PLUS_BR",
> "TUF GAMING X570-PRO (WI-FI)",
> "TUF GAMING Z490-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING Z490-PLUS (WI-FI)",
> + "Z490-GUNDAM (WI-FI)",
> };
>
> static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
> + "EX-B660M-V5 D4",
> "EX-B660M-V5 PRO D4",
> "PRIME B650-PLUS",
> "PRIME B650M-A",
> "PRIME B650M-A AX",
> + "PRIME B650M-A AX II",
> "PRIME B650M-A II",
> "PRIME B650M-A WIFI",
> "PRIME B650M-A WIFI II",
> @@ -1124,20 +1143,33 @@ static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
> "PRIME X670E-PRO WIFI",
> "PRIME Z590-A",
> "PRIME Z590-P",
> + "PRIME Z590-P WIFI",
> + "PRIME Z590-V",
> "PRIME Z590M-PLUS",
> + "Pro B660M-C",
> "Pro B660M-C-D4",
> + "Pro WS W680-ACE",
> + "Pro WS W680-ACE IPMI",
> + "ProArt B650-CREATOR",
> "ProArt B660-CREATOR D4",
> "ProArt X670E-CREATOR WIFI",
> + "ProArt Z790-CREATOR WIFI",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR X670E EXTREME",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR X670E GENE",
> "ROG CROSSHAIR X670E HERO",
> + "ROG MAXIMUS XIII APEX",
> + "ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME",
> "ROG MAXIMUS XIII EXTREME GLACIAL",
> + "ROG MAXIMUS XIII HERO",
> + "ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX",
> "ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME",
> "ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL",
> + "ROG MAXIMUS Z790 EXTREME",
> "ROG STRIX B650-A GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX B650E-E GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX B650E-F GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX B650E-I GAMING WIFI",
> + "ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX B660-A GAMING WIFI D4",
> "ROG STRIX B660-F GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX B660-G GAMING WIFI",
> @@ -1146,16 +1178,24 @@ static const char * const asus_msi_boards[] = {
> "ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX X670E-F GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX X670E-I GAMING WIFI",
> + "ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX Z590-A GAMING WIFI II",
> + "ROG STRIX Z590-E GAMING WIFI",
> + "ROG STRIX Z590-F GAMING WIFI",
> + "ROG STRIX Z590-I GAMING WIFI",
> "ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4",
> "TUF GAMING B650-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI",
> "TUF GAMING B650M-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING B650M-PLUS WIFI",
> + "TUF GAMING B660-PLUS WIFI D4",
> + "TUF GAMING B660M-E D4",
> "TUF GAMING B660M-PLUS WIFI",
> "TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI",
> + "TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS",
> "TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS WIFI",
> + "Z590 WIFI GUNDAM EDITION",
> };
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)
On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
> Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
>
> Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
>
> Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C II"
> patch?
>
Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all patches
in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
Guenter
On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:58:24 -0700
Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
> > Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
> >
> > Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
> >
> > Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C II"
> > patch?
> >
> Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all
> patches in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
>
> Guenter
>
No, Thank you!
I just like to mention that Holger Kiehl sent separate patch with
"Pro A520M-C II" support and it could create conflicts. I have found it only
when I have sent my patches.
On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:04:53 +0200
Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:58:24 -0700
> Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
> > > Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
> > >
> > > Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C
> > > II" patch?
> > >
> > Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all
> > patches in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
> >
> > Guenter
> >
>
> No, Thank you!
>
> I just like to mention that Holger Kiehl sent separate patch with
> "Pro A520M-C II" support and it could create conflicts. I have found it only
> when I have sent my patches.
>
I have rechecked repo and "Pro A520M-C II" is added twice after apply both of
patches (my and from Holger Kiehl), could you please remove one of mention of
it?
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:04:53AM +0200, Denis Pauk wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:58:24 -0700
> Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
> > > Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
> > >
> > > Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C II"
> > > patch?
> > >
> > Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all
> > patches in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
> >
> > Guenter
> >
>
> No, Thank you!
>
> I just like to mention that Holger Kiehl sent separate patch with
> "Pro A520M-C II" support and it could create conflicts. I have found it only
It didn't.
Guenter
On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:17:49 +0200
Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:04:53 +0200
> Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:58:24 -0700
> > Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
> > > > Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
> > > >
> > > > Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C
> > > > II" patch?
> > > >
> > > Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all
> > > patches in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
> > >
> > > Guenter
> > >
> >
> > No, Thank you!
> >
> > I just like to mention that Holger Kiehl sent separate patch with
> > "Pro A520M-C II" support and it could create conflicts. I have found it only
> > when I have sent my patches.
> >
>
> I have rechecked repo and "Pro A520M-C II" is added twice after apply both of
> patches (my and from Holger Kiehl), could you please remove one of mention of
> it?
I have resent updated version of this patch without duplication of adding "Pro
A520M-C II",
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
you could revert this patch and add apply new one, or fix this one.
Thank you!
Best regards,
Denis.
On 3/15/23 15:35, Denis Pauk wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:17:49 +0200
> Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:04:53 +0200
>> Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:58:24 -0700
>>> Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/15/23 14:30, Denis Pauk wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 23:01:35 +0200
>>>>> Denis Pauk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested-by: Holger Kiehl <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pro A520M-C II/CSM is also tested by Holger Kiehl
>>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
>>>>>
>>>>> Could it be applied as single patch or need to rebase over "Pro A520M-C
>>>>> II" patch?
>>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I just applied all
>>>> patches in sequence as received, with no conflicts. Should I undo that ?
>>>>
>>>> Guenter
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, Thank you!
>>>
>>> I just like to mention that Holger Kiehl sent separate patch with
>>> "Pro A520M-C II" support and it could create conflicts. I have found it only
>>> when I have sent my patches.
>>>
>>
>> I have rechecked repo and "Pro A520M-C II" is added twice after apply both of
>> patches (my and from Holger Kiehl), could you please remove one of mention of
>> it?
>
> I have resent updated version of this patch without duplication of adding "Pro
> A520M-C II",
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-hwmon/patch/[email protected]/
>
> you could revert this patch and add apply new one, or fix this one.
>
Done. You could avoid this kind of problem by keeping board names
in alphabetic order.
Guenter