On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Leo Li wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Tracy Smith wrote:
>> Hello, bus recovery is needed generally speaking because of potential
>> protocol errors that might cause a failure condition hanging the bus.
>>
>> It happens frequently during bring-up of new
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:34:31PM -0700, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> Yeah it is a bit a wording thing: In my understanding, pinctrl is
>> required on SoC's witch have a pin controller... It is just that the
>> driver does not need to
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Tracy Smith wrote:
> Hello, bus recovery is needed generally speaking because of potential
> protocol errors that might cause a failure condition hanging the bus.
>
> It happens frequently during bring-up of new I2C devices because firmware in
> I2C controllers fail
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Lothar Waßmann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:37:12 -0500 Leo Li wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> > On 2016-09-08 16:57, Leo Li wrote:
> [...]
>> >> people fix problem that they don't really care by deliberately enlarge
>>
Hi,
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:37:12 -0500 Leo Li wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> > On 2016-09-08 16:57, Leo Li wrote:
[...]
> >> people fix problem that they don't really care by deliberately enlarge
> >> the problem. That's why we don't panic() on any error we found.
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:34:31PM -0700, Stefan Agner wrote:
> Yeah it is a bit a wording thing: In my understanding, pinctrl is
> required on SoC's witch have a pin controller... It is just that the
> driver does not need to get the pinctrl by itself because the stack is
> taking care of
On 2016-09-09 12:37, Leo Li wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 2016-09-08 16:57, Leo Li wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
On 2016-09-06 15:40, Leo Li wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 2016
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-09-08 16:57, Leo Li wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>>> On 2016-09-06 15:40, Leo Li wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
>> On Tue,
On 2016-09-08 16:57, Leo Li wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 2016-09-06 15:40, Leo Li wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-09-06 15:40, Leo Li wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>>> On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500,
On 2016-09-06 15:40, Leo Li wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
> @@ -1081,8 +1090,11 @@ static int i2c
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Tracy Smith wrote:
> Hello, bus recovery is needed generally speaking because of potential
> protocol errors that might cause a failure condition hanging the bus.
>
> It happens frequently during bring-up of new I2C devices because firmware in
> I2C controllers fail
Hello,
On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 06:35:38PM -0500, Tracy Smith wrote:
> >The patch makes it really optional that
> >the probe function won't bailout but just disable the bus recovery function
> >when pinctrl is not available.
>
> in the case of the LS1043A and LS1021A, if the bus recovery function
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 03:06:41PM -0500, Leo Li wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
>> >> Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus r
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
driver s
On 2016-09-06 13:06, Leo Li wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
>>> Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
>>> driver starts to use gpio/pinctrl to do i2c bus recovery. But pinct
On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 03:06:41PM -0500, Leo Li wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
> >> Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
> >> driver starts to use gpio/pinctrl to do i2c
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
>> Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
>> driver starts to use gpio/pinctrl to do i2c bus recovery. But pinctrl
>> is not always available for platform
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
> Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
> driver starts to use gpio/pinctrl to do i2c bus recovery. But pinctrl
> is not always available for platforms with this controller such as ls1021a
> and ls1043a, and the
Since commit 1c4b6c3bcf30 ("i2c: imx: implement bus recovery") the
driver starts to use gpio/pinctrl to do i2c bus recovery. But pinctrl
is not always available for platforms with this controller such as ls1021a
and ls1043a, and the device tree binding also mentioned this gpio based
recovery mecha
20 matches
Mail list logo