On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 07:40:44PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
I don't have the bandwidth for a full review right now. However, I
already wanted to tell you guys that my gut feeling is that this
protocol is quite far away from I2C. P2WI was already at the edge.
Maybe there is a better
From that regard, RSB is a multiple device bus, using addresses, just
like I2C. The way it communicates is basically the one used by P2WI.
I am not keen to allow everything which is a bus and has addresses
into the I2C realm. The addresses are 12 bit, whilst I2C has at maximum
10 bit which is
Hi Wolfram,
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 06:27:11PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:24:43PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
The RSB controller looks like an SMBus controller which only supports byte
and word data transfers. It can also do double-word data transfers, but the
I2C
I don't have the bandwidth for a full review right now. However, I
already wanted to tell you guys that my gut feeling is that this
protocol is quite far away from I2C. P2WI was already at the edge.
Maybe there is a better place for such custom stuff? I dunno yet.
That's unfortunate,
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:24:43PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
The RSB controller looks like an SMBus controller which only supports byte
and word data transfers. It can also do double-word data transfers, but the
I2C subsystem does not support this, nor have we seen devices using this.
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:24:43PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
The RSB controller looks like an SMBus controller which only supports byte
and word data transfers. It can also do double-word data transfers, but the
I2C subsystem does not support this, nor have we seen devices using this.
The
The RSB controller looks like an SMBus controller which only supports byte
and word data transfers. It can also do double-word data transfers, but the
I2C subsystem does not support this, nor have we seen devices using this.
The RSB differs from standard SMBus protocol on several aspects:
- it
