On 24 January 2013 08:58, ludovic.desroches [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi,


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

quoted

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.

I assumed the new driver handles the HW quirks better than the old atmel-twi
driver(?). So the RM9200 i2c HW is at least usable with this driver.

I didn't encounter any problems during my short testing using a couple of
different i2c devices. As far as I can remember the old driver didn't even
handle the devices I tested with the new driver.

regards
Joachim Eastwood