Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001397
--- Comment #13 from Ilija Kocho <[email protected]> 2012-02-07 20:37:36 GMT --- Hi Tomas I'm sorry for this delay. You have placed things such as IRQ priorities in HAL rather than with device CDL which is not an usual practice. On second consideration I realized that it is good to have IRQ priorities at HAL because they are being resolved by HAL (NVIC). Next step was a logical consequence: Why not consolidate all IRQ priorities and put them togeteher. Anyway it's not priority what counts but relative priority differences between IRQs.So I introduced the same to all drivers and it took some time. You can find update at bug Bug 1001450. Now little discussion on your driver. Recently I worked on DSPI so this quiestion is based on that experience and it may or may not have snse here: -Can I2C clock be defined on device basis like at SPI? Next is general, could it be possible to provide user with option to set I2C speed (clock) rather than prescaler value? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
