Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:56:24PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > > support taken. > > Sadly, I can't get it to apply cleanly. Could you rebase and retest? > Ok I'll handle it and add my Acked-by. Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:56:24PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > > support taken. > > Sadly, I can't get it to apply cleanly. Could you rebase and retest? > Ok I'll handle it and add my Acked-by. Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
> Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > support taken. Sadly, I can't get it to apply cleanly. Could you rebase and retest? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
> Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > support taken. Sadly, I can't get it to apply cleanly. Could you rebase and retest? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:42:57AM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:51:36PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > > > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > > > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > > > > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. > > > > Pity. > > > > But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? > > > > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > support taken. Not needed now, but next time please give a formal ack. Patchwork collects them for me automatically, this saves me quite some work. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:42:57AM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:51:36PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > > > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > > > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > > > > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. > > > > Pity. > > > > But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? > > > > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave > support taken. Not needed now, but next time please give a formal ack. Patchwork collects them for me automatically, this saves me quite some work. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:51:36PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. > > Pity. > > But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave support taken. Regards Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:51:36PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. > > Pity. > > But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? > Yes sure, you can add my Ack. I would be pleased to see the slave support taken. Regards Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
> Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. Pity. But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
> Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only > issue I had while testing the slave support. > > > > > BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being > > master and slave on the same bus? > > > > No the master and slave modes are exclusive. Pity. But thanks for the heads up, any tag you want to give? Ack or Rev? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
Sorry for the delay to answer. I changed my email filters. Unfortunately
there was a bug and I missed message from this mailing list...
On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:35:13PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 06:22:29PM +0100, Juergen Fitschen wrote:
> > Slave mode driver is based on the concept of i2c-designware driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Juergen Fitschen
>
> I lost the original mail where Ludovic said:
>
> "I tested it quickly on a sama5d2 xplained board: I used an i2c-gpio
> master and the eeprom driver. It works pretty well. I tried to increase
> the size of the eeprom by adding:
> + { "slave-24c64", 65536 / 8 },"
>
> That won't work. The comment at the beginning of the file says:
>
> * ... It is prepared to simulate bigger EEPROMs with an internal 16 bit
> * pointer, yet implementation is deferred until the need actually arises.
>
> So, no EEPROMs > 256 byte for now.
Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only
issue I had while testing the slave support.
>
> BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being
> master and slave on the same bus?
>
No the master and slave modes are exclusive.
Regards
Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
Sorry for the delay to answer. I changed my email filters. Unfortunately
there was a bug and I missed message from this mailing list...
On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:35:13PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 06:22:29PM +0100, Juergen Fitschen wrote:
> > Slave mode driver is based on the concept of i2c-designware driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Juergen Fitschen
>
> I lost the original mail where Ludovic said:
>
> "I tested it quickly on a sama5d2 xplained board: I used an i2c-gpio
> master and the eeprom driver. It works pretty well. I tried to increase
> the size of the eeprom by adding:
> + { "slave-24c64", 65536 / 8 },"
>
> That won't work. The comment at the beginning of the file says:
>
> * ... It is prepared to simulate bigger EEPROMs with an internal 16 bit
> * pointer, yet implementation is deferred until the need actually arises.
>
> So, no EEPROMs > 256 byte for now.
Sorry for having not catched it. If I remember well, it was the only
issue I had while testing the slave support.
>
> BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being
> master and slave on the same bus?
>
No the master and slave modes are exclusive.
Regards
Ludovic
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 06:22:29PM +0100, Juergen Fitschen wrote:
> Slave mode driver is based on the concept of i2c-designware driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Fitschen
I lost the original mail where Ludovic said:
"I tested it quickly on a sama5d2 xplained board: I used an i2c-gpio
master and the eeprom driver. It works pretty well. I tried to increase
the size of the eeprom by adding:
+ { "slave-24c64", 65536 / 8 },"
That won't work. The comment at the beginning of the file says:
* ... It is prepared to simulate bigger EEPROMs with an internal 16 bit
* pointer, yet implementation is deferred until the need actually arises.
So, no EEPROMs > 256 byte for now.
BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being
master and slave on the same bus?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [v2,3/3] i2c: at91: added slave mode support
On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 06:22:29PM +0100, Juergen Fitschen wrote:
> Slave mode driver is based on the concept of i2c-designware driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Fitschen
I lost the original mail where Ludovic said:
"I tested it quickly on a sama5d2 xplained board: I used an i2c-gpio
master and the eeprom driver. It works pretty well. I tried to increase
the size of the eeprom by adding:
+ { "slave-24c64", 65536 / 8 },"
That won't work. The comment at the beginning of the file says:
* ... It is prepared to simulate bigger EEPROMs with an internal 16 bit
* pointer, yet implementation is deferred until the need actually arises.
So, no EEPROMs > 256 byte for now.
BTW maybe I asked already and forgot: is this IP core capable of being
master and slave on the same bus?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
