Hello Addy,
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:59:49AM +0800, Addy Ke wrote:
high_ns calculated from the low division of CLKDIV register is the sum
of actual measured high_ns and rise_ns. The rise time which related to
I think actual measured is misleading here. (The driver doesn't
dermine these
There are different capitalisation of i2c in the patch and the commit log. I
don't know what Wolfram prefers here, but using the same spelling
everywhere would be nice.
Can you please point out? IIRC you should always capitalize I2C in
prose (descriptions, comments, documentation,
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de wrote:
There are different capitalisation of i2c in the patch and the commit log.
I
don't know what Wolfram prefers here, but using the same spelling
everywhere would be nice.
Can you please point out? IIRC you
Hello,
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:53:44AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
So just to summarize for Addy, I think you're being asked to spin one more
time.
1. Update the patch description as per Uwe. Fix other typos pointed out by
him.
2. Since you're spinning anyway, adjust i2c
On 2014/12/8 10:59, Addy Ke wrote:
high_ns calculated from the low division of CLKDIV register is the sum
of actual measured high_ns and rise_ns. The rise time which related to
external pull-up resistor can be up to the maximum rise time in I2C spec.
In my test, if external pull-up resistor
