On 07/17/2015 08:08 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
As promised here is my RFC to improve address spaces for I2C. This should give
i2c seperate address spaces for standard clients, 10 bit clients, and our own
slave clients. So, you can now have a 7 bit slave at 0x50 and a 10 bit slave at
0x050. Or, you can have a slave driver listening at some address and at the
same time have a client driver talking to this address. Note that this is only
the core support for that separation, I am still not sure if there is hardware
being able talking to its own slave address, but we will see.
This RFC and while I did some quick tests, it is not thoroughly tested. But I
wanted to push it out before I leave the computer for the weekend. It still
shows what path I chose to solve the problem. So, comments on that and further
testing are more than welcome!
BTW Andrey, I did not modify your patch and couldn't get the i2c-slave-eeprom
driver
to work with my Jetson TK1. Does this work for you?
This approach makes sense to me.
I'd expect patch 2/9 "dt-bindings: add header for generic I2C flags in
bindings" to document the flags (or at least mention their existence,
and point at the new header file) in the core I2C bindings document.
Please consider the series,
Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
(ack rather than review since I didn't review patch 1, and mostly
concentrated on reviewing the concepts of how slaves were represented
rather than the coding details).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
