Hi Haavard, On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:53:59 +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:34:57 +0100 > Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > + bit_data->udelay = 5, /* 100 kHz */ > > > > + bit_data->timeout = HZ / 10, /* 100 ms */ > > > > > > Can we add these udelay/timeout to struct i2c_gpio_platform_data? And > > > let customer to choose these according their specific requirement. We > > > use Kconfig to do this, but Jean and David don't like the idea, -:( > > > > Yeah, they need to be a bit more configurable than they currently are. > > And I think it makes sense to pass them from the board setup code, since > > this is where things depending on board-specific details (signal quality > > issues, pullup resistor values, etc.) are supposed to go. > > By the way, timeout seems to be hardcoded to 100 jiffies in the > i2c-algo-bit driver, so there's probably not much point passing it from > the board code when it's going to be overridden anyway. I'll add just a > udelay parameter to the platform struct for now.
No, it's not hardcoded. I know it looks confusing. struct i2c_adapter has a timeout field, that's the one being set to 100 in i2c-algo-bit, but i2c-algo-bit uses the i2c_algo_bit_data timeout field. The i2c_adapter timeout field is unused. This is clearly calling for a cleanup but I don't have time for this right now. -- Jean Delvare - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
