Hello Lukasz,
Am 31.03.2014 16:36, schrieb Lukasz Majewski:
Hi Simon,
Hi Lukasz,
On 27 March 2014 11:33, Lukasz Majewski<l.majew...@samsung.com>
wrote: Hi Simon, Heiko
From: Aaron Durbin<adur...@chromium.org>
The current pmic i2c code assumes the current i2c bus is
the same as the pmic device's bus. There is nothing ensuring
that to be true. Therefore, select the proper bus before performing
a transaction.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin<adur...@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass<s...@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass<s...@chromium.org>
---
drivers/power/power_i2c.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/power/power_i2c.c b/drivers/power/power_i2c.c
index ac76870..594cd11 100644
--- a/drivers/power/power_i2c.c
+++ b/drivers/power/power_i2c.c
@@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ int pmic_reg_write(struct pmic *p, u32 reg, u32
val) if (check_reg(p, reg))
return -1;
+ I2C_SET_BUS(p->bus);
+
Hadn't we had a discussion about this explicit setting of I2C some
time ago? I thought that this problem was solved within the I2C
rework.
Also I might be wrong, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't the
I2C_SET_BUS() macro regarded as a obsolete after the I2C rework?
Agreed that would be ideal, but we would have to pass the bus number
of the i2c_read/write() functions. I don't believe the i2c code has
got that far yet.
Unfortunately it doesn't work without this patch.
If Heiko doesn't object, then I won't protest.
It s okay for me, so to clarify:
Acked-by: Heiko Schocher <h...@denx.de>
bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
