On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:32:11AM +0100, Jesper Nilsson wrote:

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:07:47AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:09:33PM +0100, Marten Lindahl wrote:

quoted

quoted

Any reason why not "|= MASTER_ID(i2c->adap.nr)" here instead of more
expensive IO read? It's quite important because your current code will
bitwise-or old I2C slave address with a new one... This should break
during tests with multiple I2C slave devices, shouldn't it?

You are correct. It is better to use the macro instead, and yes,
safer too. I only have one device that supports high speed i2c, but
I get your point. It could potentially break.

quoted

On which HW did you test it?

I used an Artpec development board as master and INA230EVM board
as slave.

Artpec development board with? What SoC?

The ARTPEC-line of SoC:s are Axis Communications own ASICs, in the latest iteration
it's a Cortex-53 and includes instances of the exynos5 HSI2C ip.

Cool! Good to see that this code is re-used. :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel