Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-23 Thread EUNBONG SONG
Sender : Wolfram Sang Date : 2013-04-24 01:27 (GMT+09:00) Title : Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value > Well, OK, I don't mind. We can increase it later if needed. > Applied to for-next, thanks! Please have a look later how I changed yo

Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-23 Thread Wolfram Sang
Hi, what mail client do you use? It seems to break message threading on my side :( > > Have you been writing to EEPROMS? Their erase/write cycle might be > > longer. But I am not forcing you to change the value, just giving some > > suggestions. > > My board has i2c mux, temp sensor, eeprom. A

Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-20 Thread EUNBONG SONG
> > Have you been writing to EEPROMS? Their erase/write cycle might be > longer. But I am not forcing you to change the value, just giving some > suggestions. My board has i2c mux, temp sensor, eeprom. And I added some debugging code for measuring i2c response time as below and run i2c opera

Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-19 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 09:13:54AM +, EUNBONG SONG wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:01:04AM +, EUNBONG SONG wrote: > >> > >> I think HZ/50 is better than 2 for adapter timeout. > > > Basically OK. But why HZ/50? Most drivers use HZ. > > Actually, I just translated 2 jiffies bec

Re: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-19 Thread EUNBONG SONG
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:01:04AM +, EUNBONG SONG wrote: >> >> I think HZ/50 is better than 2 for adapter timeout. > Basically OK. But why HZ/50? Most drivers use HZ. Actually, I just translated 2 jiffies because HZ is 100 in default cavium config. You can find that in "arch/mips/confi

Re: [PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-19 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:01:04AM +, EUNBONG SONG wrote: > > I think HZ/50 is better than 2 for adapter timeout. Basically OK. But why HZ/50? Most drivers use HZ. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org

[PATCH] I2C: Change the value of octeon i2c adapter timeout value

2013-04-18 Thread EUNBONG SONG
I think HZ/50 is better than 2 for adapter timeout. Signed-off-by: Eunbong Song --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-octeon.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-octeon.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-octeon.c index 935585e..ca489f3 100644 --- a/dri