Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-23 Thread Jean Delvare
Lennart, On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:41:51 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:49:33PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > The scx200_acb driver was heavily modified in 2.6.17 and 2.6.18, not > > much since then. I am not familiar with the hardware so I can't comment > > on which chi

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-22 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:49:33PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > The scx200_acb driver was heavily modified in 2.6.17 and 2.6.18, not > much since then. I am not familiar with the hardware so I can't comment > on which chips are supposed to work and which aren't. Well 2.6.18's scx200_acb works on t

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-20 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Lennart, On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:59:42 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:54:13AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > The major difference is that the implementation in scx200_i2c is > > hardware-specific, while the i2c-gpio driver is a generic one, so it's > > a lot better.

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-19 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:54:13AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > The major difference is that the implementation in scx200_i2c is > hardware-specific, while the i2c-gpio driver is a generic one, so it's > a lot better. > > What this means is that i2c-gpio obsoletes scx200_i2c, so I am inclined > to

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-18 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Len, On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:42:56 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 07:28:07PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Otherwise it looks OK to me, I take the patch. If others have comments > > or objections, just speak up and submit incremental patches as needed. > > > > Now I w

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-18 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 07:28:07PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Otherwise it looks OK to me, I take the patch. If others have comments > or objections, just speak up and submit incremental patches as needed. > > Now I would like to see platform code actually using this. Any idea how similar this

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-14 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Haavard, On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:34:18 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:56:47 +0200 > Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > o Default to a very low SCL frequency (6.6 kHz) if clock stretching > > isn't supported > > This would have been true if I ha

Re: [PATCH v3] Bitbanging i2c bus driver using the GPIO API

2007-04-14 Thread Haavard Skinnemoen
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:56:47 +0200 Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > o Default to a very low SCL frequency (6.6 kHz) if clock stretching > isn't supported This would have been true if I had remembered to save before generating the patch... Updated patch below. Sorry about the