On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:18:11PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 06:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >Please note what I said about convenience - if lots of devices have
> >exactly the same set of constraints to set up it's possible sensible to
> >have a standard way of specifying the
On 04/15/2014 06:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 03:34:55PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 04/15/2014 02:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
- Providing APIs for registering actual smbus devices as a convenience
for devices with that constraint, regardless of how that is done
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 03:34:55PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 02:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > - Providing APIs for registering actual smbus devices as a convenience
> >for devices with that constraint, regardless of how that is done
> >behind the scenes.
> > - Havi
On 04/15/2014 02:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
My suggestion is that in regmap_init_i2c() you check the capabilities of the
I2C adapter. If it supports native I2C you setup the regmap with the
regmap_i2c struct just as it does right now. If the adapter does not support
native I2C, check if the d
On 04/15/2014 02:40 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 15/04/2014 14:25, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 04/15/2014 01:54 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 15/04/2014 12:09, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
The
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:25:15PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 01:54 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> >And, should I keep one method to register an smbus regmap or should I
> >provide one method per access type and get rid of the
> >regmap_smbus_transfer_type enum ?
> I don't thi
On 15/04/2014 14:25, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 01:54 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15/04/2014 12:09, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
> The transfer type gets set once
On 04/15/2014 01:54 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 15/04/2014 12:09, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
The transfer type gets set once per device at init time so why not
just parameterise based on val_by
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 01:54:02PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> On 15/04/2014 12:09, Mark Brown wrote:
> > OK, so if this a realistic issue then it seems like it's better to
> > implement three different buses - there is not really any common code
> > between the various paths.
> Okay, I'll cr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15/04/2014 12:09, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
>> On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> The transfer type gets set once per device at init time so why not
>>> just parameterise based o
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The transfer type gets set once per device at init time so why not
> > just parameterise based on val_bytes?
> Actually, you may want to transfer 1 byte registers using the block
> method
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14/04/2014 23:04, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 03:08:05PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
>> SMBus is a subset of the I2C protocol, oftenly used to access
registers on
>> external devices.
>
> This is basically fine. However...
>
>>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 03:08:05PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> SMBus is a subset of the I2C protocol, oftenly used to access registers on
> external devices.
This is basically fine. However...
> + switch (ctx->transfer_type) {
> + case REGMAP_SMBUS_BYTE_TRANSFER:
> + whil
13 matches
Mail list logo
