On 04.04.2017 14:26, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 10:28:23AM +0200, Michael Hennerich wrote:
A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c and
plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid
On 04.04.2017 14:26, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 10:28:23AM +0200, Michael Hennerich wrote:
A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c and
plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 10:28:23AM +0200, Michael Hennerich wrote:
> A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c and
> plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
> In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid double locks,
> and therefore use
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 10:28:23AM +0200, Michael Hennerich wrote:
> A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c and
> plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
> In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid double locks,
> and therefore use
Hi Mark,
During the discussion here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/4/76
A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c
and plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid double
locks, and therefore use
Hi Mark,
During the discussion here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/4/76
A question came up, regarding whether it's recommended to mix regmap_i2c
and plain i2c_smbus or direct adapter transfers.
In this specific case for the i2c MUX portion we need to avoid double
locks, and therefore use
6 matches
Mail list logo
