Hi,

On 01/24/2013 08:27 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:02:32AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

quoted

On 22:42 Wed 05 Dec     , Joachim Eastwood wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Joachim Eastwood <redacted>
---
Hi,

AT91RM9200 is gaining DT support now so let's add an id to the i2c driver.

Tested on custom RM9200 board. Since the driver doesn't support pinctrl
muxing yet I had to add pinctrl hogs for the i2c pins in my dts for it
to work.

IIRC the i2c IP have quite a lots of issue on rm9200 and until sam9g45

it not recommended to use it instead use i2c-gpio

Ludovic, you know the driver best. Does it make sense to add this?

I didn't add this when I did the rework because there was no DT tree 
support for RM9200. The configuration for RM9200 IP is already in the 
driver and used for non DT platform so I think it makes sense to add this.

But as Jean-Christophe said, it's recommended to use the i2c-gpio driver 
since we know the first versions of the IP have several issues. However 
if it fits user usage, it is not forbidden to use it.

Regards

Ludovic

quoted

Best Regards,
J.

quoted

regards
Joachim Eastwood

  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 3 +++
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index b4575ee..c504aa8 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c

@@ -584,6 +584,9 @@ static const struct platform_device_id at91_twi_devtypes[] = {
  #if defined(CONFIG_OF)
  static const struct of_device_id atmel_twi_dt_ids[] = {
  	{
+		.compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-i2c",
+		.data = &at91rm9200_config,
+	} , {
  		.compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260-i2c",
  		.data = &at91sam9260_config,
  	} , {
--

1.8.0

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html