On 5/3/2024 12:39 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 03.05.24 um 00:26 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
>> On 5/2/2024 3:46 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 30.04.24 um 19:38 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced
"master/slave"
>>>
Hi
Am 03.05.24 um 00:26 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
On 5/2/2024 3:46 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Am 30.04.24 um 19:38 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced "master/slave"
with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's
se
On 5/2/2024 3:46 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>
>
> Am 30.04.24 um 19:38 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
>> I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced "master/slave"
>> with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's
>> series to fix drivers/i2c/[1], fix the te
Am 30.04.24 um 19:38 schrieb Easwar Hariharan:
I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced "master/slave"
with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's
series to fix drivers/i2c/[1], fix the terminology for users of
I2C_ALGOBIT bitbanging interface, n
I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced "master/slave"
with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's
series to fix drivers/i2c/[1], fix the terminology for users of
I2C_ALGOBIT bitbanging interface, now that the approved verbiage exists
in the specific
