Hi Simon,
thanks for the reviews.
On 11/10/2018 05:13, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Jean-Jacques,
On 5 October 2018 at 10:45, Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> wrote:
In a non-DM environment, it is possible to test the presence of a chip
using i2c_probe(chip_addr).
dm_i2c_probe_device() brings the same functionality with a DM interface.
The intent is to be able to test the presence of a chip for the device has
been created with i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(bus_num, chip_addr, ...)
Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com>
---
Changes in v2: None
drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c | 8 ++++++++
include/i2c.h | 13 +++++++++++++
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c
index c5a3c4e..ec88168 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c
@@ -378,6 +378,14 @@ int dm_i2c_probe(struct udevice *bus, uint chip_addr, uint
chip_flags,
return ret;
}
+int dm_i2c_probe_device(struct udevice *dev)
+{
+ struct udevice *bus = dev_get_parent(dev);
+ struct dm_i2c_chip *chip = dev_get_parent_platdata(dev);
+
+ return i2c_probe_chip(bus, chip->chip_addr, chip->flags);
+}
Why not just probe the device? That should have the same effect.
The device itself is not probed when using i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(). I
could have changed it there but was sure about possible side-effects on
all boards.
The code that uses the non-DM API usually calls I2C_probe() at some
point, this function is the equivalent in the DM world.
JJ
Regards,
Simon
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
