Re: [PATCH] i2c: Split I2C_M_NOSTART support out of I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING

On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 11:53:36AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

Since there are uses for I2C_M_NOSTART which are much more sensible and
standard than most of the protocol mangling functionality (the main one
being gather writes to devices where something like a register address
needs to be inserted before a block of data) create a new I2C_FUNC_NOSTART
for this feature and update all the users to use it.

In the case of regmap-i2c we remove the requirement for mangling as
I2C_M_NOSTART is the only mangling feature which is being used.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie-yzvPICuk2AATkU/dhu1WVueM+bqZidxxQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org>

Applied to next, thanks! Jean, let me know if you prefer to take it.
Acks from input and fbdev maintainers still appreciated.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Hi Wolfram,

On Thu, 3 May 2012 13:35:46 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:

On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 11:53:36AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

Since there are uses for I2C_M_NOSTART which are much more sensible and
standard than most of the protocol mangling functionality (the main one
being gather writes to devices where something like a register address
needs to be inserted before a block of data) create a new I2C_FUNC_NOSTART
for this feature and update all the users to use it.

In the case of regmap-i2c we remove the requirement for mangling as
I2C_M_NOSTART is the only mangling feature which is being used.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <redacted>

Applied to next, thanks! Jean, let me know if you prefer to take it.
Acks from input and fbdev maintainers still appreciated.

I'd prefer to take it, yes, as it touches the core infrastructure.

Thanks,
-- 
Jean Delvare