* Tony Lindgren [131008 15:19]:
> * Wolfram Sang [131008 14:01]:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 01:27:13AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * zhangfei gao [130829 23:36]:
> > > > What about concerns from Wolfram:
> > > > " Other people might be
> > > > depending on subsys_initcall to get I2C activ
On 16:53 Thu 17 Oct , Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>
> > On 10:33 Thu 17 Oct , srinivas kandagatla wrote:
> > > On 17/10/13 08:27, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > >>> >> +
> > > >>> >> +static struct of_device_id st_i2c_match[] =
Em Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:51:00 +0200
Lars-Peter Clausen escreveu:
> The 'driver' field of the i2c_client struct is redundant and is going to be
> removed. The results of the expressions 'client->driver.driver->field' and
> 'client->dev.driver->field' are identical, so replace all occurrences of the
Em Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:51:01 +0200
Lars-Peter Clausen escreveu:
> The 'driver' field of the i2c_client struct is redundant and is going to be
> removed. The results of the expressions 'client->driver.driver->field' and
> 'client->dev.driver->field' are identical, so replace all occurrences of the
On 10/17/2013 04:16 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 09:27 Thu 17 Oct , Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
>> Hi Jean-Christophe,
>>
>> On 10/16/2013 05:14 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
+
+static inline void st_i2c_set_bits(void __iomem *reg, u32 mask)
On 10:33 Thu 17 Oct , srinivas kandagatla wrote:
> On 17/10/13 08:27, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> > ...
> >>> >> +
> >>> >> +static struct of_device_id st_i2c_match[] = {
> >>> >> + { .compatible = "st,comms-ssc-i2c", },
> >> > the rules is to put the first soc that use the ip in the compatibl
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 10:33 Thu 17 Oct , srinivas kandagatla wrote:
> > On 17/10/13 08:27, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> > > ...
> > >>> >> +
> > >>> >> +static struct of_device_id st_i2c_match[] = {
> > >>> >> + { .compatible = "st,comms-ssc-i2c", },
On 09:27 Thu 17 Oct , Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> Hi Jean-Christophe,
>
> On 10/16/2013 05:14 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>
>
> ...
> >> +
> >> +static inline void st_i2c_set_bits(void __iomem *reg, u32 mask)
> >> +{
> >> + writel(readl(reg) | mask, reg);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>
Am Donnerstag, den 17.10.2013, 15:30 +0100 schrieb srinivas kandagatla:
[...]
> Sorry to ask this but, Where is this requirement coming from?
> I have not spotted any thing as such in ePAPR specs.
>
>
> All the spec says is.
> ===
> The compatible property value consists of one or more strings th
On 17/10/13 15:19, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 10:33 Thu 17 Oct , srinivas kandagatla wrote:
>> On 17/10/13 08:27, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
>>> ...
>>> +
>>> +static struct of_device_id st_i2c_match[] = {
>>> + { .compatible = "st,comms-ssc-i2c", },
> the rule
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 09:32:51PM -0700, Christian Daudt wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> This patch does not work as it relies on the yet-unmerged clock code
> for bcm11351. This patch does not apply to -rc, and when tweaked it
> does not compile as it references non-existent bsc_clks.
> Has the clk patches
On 17/10/13 08:27, Maxime COQUELIN wrote:
> ...
>>> >> +
>>> >> +static struct of_device_id st_i2c_match[] = {
>>> >> + { .compatible = "st,comms-ssc-i2c", },
>> > the rules is to put the first soc that use the ip in the compatible
>> > as st,sti7100-scc-i2c
> Ok. There are no plans to upstream
Hi Jean-Christophe,
On 10/16/2013 05:14 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
...
>> +
>> +static inline void st_i2c_set_bits(void __iomem *reg, u32 mask)
>> +{
>> + writel(readl(reg) | mask, reg);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void st_i2c_clr_bits(void __iomem *reg, u32 mask)
>> +{
>>
13 matches
Mail list logo
