On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:06:07PM +0200, Crt Mori wrote: > On 10 August 2015 at 11:13, Wolfram Sang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > This debate is what I wanted to have. The new Melexis sensor will be > > > using it and since I think some others might also be using it in > > > future I would rather put it to i2c. It is more i2c command than > > > sensor specific so I think it fits into i2c. > > > > There is no thing as 'I2C command'. There are just I2C messages combined > > into a transfer. I think you mix SMBus and I2C terminology here. > > > This is true, but write/read sequence can also be a request/reply > which is basically a command for reading.
This interpretation is already a layer above. In I2C, you send a message and then you receive one. > Same function as my exists in: ./drivers/base/regmap/regmap-i2c.c , > maybe it is better just to use that? Yes! Should have thought of that. Plus, you get more benefits like caching if you want. Case closed, thanks!
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
