[U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-22 Thread Nishanth Menon
V1: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/227112/ This series helps standardize register parameters for TWL4030, 6030 and 6035 used in various OMAP3,4,5 based platforms. For historical reasons, we have been following val, reg as the order of parameters while we have reg, val in every other i2c apis in

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-25 Thread Sricharan R
Hi Nishanth, On Saturday 23 March 2013 03:03 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > V1: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/227112/ > > This series helps standardize register parameters for TWL4030, 6030 and 6035 > used in various OMAP3,4,5 based platforms. > For historical reasons, we have been following val

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-25 Thread Nishanth Menon
Hi Sricharan, On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Sricharan R wrote: >All of TWL[46]03[05]_i2c_[write/read]_u8 is doing the same. (ie) > i2c_write(chip_no, reg, 1, &val, 1); > i2c_read(chip_no, reg, 1, val, 1); > > We always seem to use 1 byte addresses and length. > > Then

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-26 Thread Sricharan R
Hi Nishanth, On Monday 25 March 2013 11:50 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > Hi Sricharan, > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Sricharan R wrote: >>All of TWL[46]03[05]_i2c_[write/read]_u8 is doing the same. (ie) >> i2c_write(chip_no, reg, 1, &val, 1); >> i2c_read(chip_no, reg, 1, va

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-26 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 15:01-20130326, Sricharan R wrote: > approach we will end up creating a new tps659038.h which does exactly > the same thing. This does not feel correct. Can't we differentiate > using register names that are passed instead ? tps659038/twl6035/twl6037 all belong to palmas family of PMICs. So, ho

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 0/9] OMAP3-5: TWL[46]03[05]: cleanup register access and misc minimal cleanups

2013-03-26 Thread Sricharan R
On Tuesday 26 March 2013 06:55 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 15:01-20130326, Sricharan R wrote: >> approach we will end up creating a new tps659038.h which does exactly >> the same thing. This does not feel correct. Can't we differentiate >> using register names that are passed instead ? > tps659